Evidence-based dentistry has been established for more than a decade, and described as ‘the conscientious, explicit and judicious use of current best evidence in making decisions about the care of individual patients＇. However, Orthodontic clinicians in China still tend to base their treatment protocols on the ‘it works in my hands＇evidence provided by their peers, mainly due to their weak experience in searching and applying clinical evidences. In this article, authors are willing to share their experience with their Chinese peers, and to promote the dissemination and application of evidence-based orthodontics in clinical practice.
The main task of Campbell Collaboration is to collaborate with Cochrane Collaboration so as to produce high quality evidence for the social welfare, education, justice and criminal, international development policy and other social sciences. This article systematically introduces Campbell Collaboration, its origins, achievements and development, with the purpose of allowing more scholars understand evidence-based ideas and methods of social science, providing evidence-based methodology basis for China's social policy.
Evidence-informed decision making is one of the most common, objective and important health policy research methods used by policy makers. Its purpose is to promote the application and dissemination of research knowledge on health policy and systems to change traditional and subjective models of health policy making in order to improve national and regional health systems. Three elements will influence the effectiveness of health policy making:research evidence, available health resources and the value of policy formulation. This paper introduces some pragmatic evidence-based approaches, especially systematic reviews, priority setting and a combined approach matrix (CAM). Systematic reviews have a b impact on the decision process for policy makers. We hope that the application and development of evidence-informed methods will increase in China’s health policy research.
The analysis of big data in medical field cannot be isolated from the high quality clinical database, and the construction of first aid database in our country is still in the early stage of exploration. This paper introduces the idea and key technology of the construction of multi-parameter first aid database. By combining emergency business flow with information flow, an emergency data integration model was designed with reference to the architecture of the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care III (MIMIC-III), created by Computational Physiology Laboratory of Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), and a high-quality first-aid database was built. The database currently covers 22 941 medical records for 19 814 different patients from May 2015 to October 2017, including relatively complete information on physiology, biochemistry, treatment, examination, nursing, etc. And based on the database, the first First-Aid Big Data Datathon event, which 13 teams from all over the country participated in, was launched. The First-Aid database provides a reference for the construction and application of clinical database in China. And it could provide powerful data support for scientific research, clinical decision making and the improvement of medical quality, which will further promote secondary analysis of clinical data in our country.
This paper introduced definition of right care, presented the evidences of overuse and underuse in the world and pointed out the importance of dissemination of evidence-based medicine to right care. Not only evidence production but also concepts of evidence-based practical are important. It is important to disseminate evidence-based medicine not only among academic societies but also among the public. These are critical for achieving right care and preventing overuse and underuse of medical care.
ObjectiveTo introduce economic evaluation methods for anticancer-drugs with basket trial design, and to provide references for related research and decision-making. MethodsA case analysis was conducted on economic evaluation methods for anticancer-drugs with basket trial design, which was issued by Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (CADTH) in the Economic Guidance Report. Moreover, both the advantages and disadvantages of the methods were analyzed in accordance with the characteristics of basket trials. ResultsPooled analysis and tumor-specific analysis were two methods frequently employed in the case analysis. However, great uncertainties were available in both of them. The uncertainty of the former was mainly reflected in the heterogeneity of the targeted population, while the uncertainty of the latter was mainly shown in the insufficient sample size of the subgroup. ConclusionCurrently, economic evaluation methods for anticancer-drugs with basket trial design are immature. Thus, researchers are required to explore the methods of innovation evaluation with lower uncertainty; reimbursement decision-makers should fully consider the uncertainty of evaluation results and enterprises should collect the real-world data for the demands of evaluation to promote the reasonable allocation of healthcare resources in China.
Objective To investigate evidence retrieval, appraisal, and reevaluation during evidence-based clinical decision making in China. Also, to analyze the related factors, so as to find the problems in the course of evidence-based clinical decision making and put forward corresponding solutions. Methods We searched Chinese Biomedical Literature Disc (CBM) and China Journal Full-text Database (Medical sciences) of the China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) to collect clinical evidence-based case reports. Relevant information was extracted from these reports by a selfdesigned investigation form.Then statistical analyses were performed. Results The search tools used in the course of evidence-based clinical decision making varied. The most frequently used were MEDLINE/PubMed (82.08%) and The Cochrane Library (60.38%). 30.63% of evidence-based case reports described the search strategy in detail, and 9.01% described how they modified their search strategy. All doctors evaluated the association between evidence and disease, but few of them integrated patient factors and relevant external factors when evaluating evidence. The scientific nature and validity of the evidence was evaluated in 74 evidence-based case reports (66.67%), and such evaluation was mainly based on the criteria of evidence grading (50.00%). Reevaluation was mentioned in 85.59% of evidence-based case reports. Conclusion In China, the application of evidence-based decision making varied in different clinical departments. Problems existed in the course of evidence retrieval, appraisal, and reevaluation. This revealed the low information diathesis level of doctors and their lack of evidence-based medicine knowledge. It is suggested that information education and evidence-based medicine education should be strengthened to improve doctors’ ability to use evidence-based clinical decision making. It is also recommended that the search tools, relevant search strategy, the modification of search strategy, and reevaluation on practice results of each case should be mentioned in evidence-based case reports.