Revisiones sistemáticas en cinco pasosV. Cómo interpretar la evidencia (Pag.-e 101854)

  1. K.S. Khan 1
  2. A. Bueno Cavanillas 1
  3. J. Zamora 2
  1. 1 Universidad de Granada, Granada, España
  2. 2 Hospital Ramón y Cajal, Madrid, España
Zeitschrift:
Semergen: revista española de medicina de familia

ISSN: 1138-3593

Datum der Publikation: 2023

Nummer: 1

Seiten: 5-5

Art: Artikel

DOI: 10.1016/J.SEMERG.2022.101854 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR

Andere Publikationen in: Semergen: revista española de medicina de familia

Zusammenfassung

The last step in a systematic review is the interpretation of the findings. The important findings need to be explicitly identified. A level of strength of evidence should be assigned to support each key finding, based on factors such as study design, methodological quality and risk of publication bias. Variations in the magnitude of associations observed also need to be explored. The aim of this analysis is to determine in which clinical groups the intervention is more or less effective, the impact of exposure is greater or lesser, or a diagnostic test is more useful. At this stage, for better interpretation of the findings, the magnitude of the association can be estimated either globally or stratified according to the characteristics of the participants. All this is helpful in formulating recommendations for clinical practice and policy.

€ Finanzierung ansehen

Informationen zur Finanzierung

Geldgeber

Bibliographische Referenzen

  • K.S. Khan, A. Bueno Cavanillas, J. Zamora Revisiones sistemáticas en cinco pasos: I. Cómo formular una pregunta para la que se pueda obtener una respuesta válida Semergen., 48 (2022), pp. 356-361, 10.1016/J.SEMERG.2021.12.005 View PDFView articleView in ScopusGoogle Scholar
  • K.S. Khan, A. Bueno-Cavanillas, J. Zamora Revisiones sistemáticas en cinco pasos: II. Cómo identificar los estudios relevantes Semergen., 48 (2022), pp. 431-436, 10.1016/J.SEMERG.2021.12.006 View PDFView articleView in ScopusGoogle Scholar
  • K.S. Khan, A. Bueno-Cavanillas, J. Zamora Revisiones sistemáticas en cinco pasos: III. Cómo evaluar la calidad de los estudios Semergen. (2022), 10.1016/j.semerg.2022.05.001 View PDF Your institution provides access to this article. Google Scholar
  • K. Saeed Khan, A. Bueno-Cavanillas, J. Zamora Revisiones sistemáticas en cinco pasos: IV. Cómo sintetizar los resultados Semergen. (2022), 10.1016/j.semerg.2022.02.006 View PDF Your institution provides access to this article. Google Scholar
  • K.S. Khan, R. Kunz, J. Kleijnen, G. Antes Systematic Reviews to Support Evidence-Based Medicine (2nd ed.), CRC Press (2011) Google Scholar
  • K.S. Khan, R. Kunz, J. Kleijnen, G. Antes Five steps to conducting a systematic review J R Soc Med., 96 (2003), pp. 118-121, 10.1177/014107680309600304 View PDF View in ScopusGoogle Scholar
  • J. Higgins, J. Thomas, J. Chandler, M. Cumpston, T. Li, M.J. Page, et al. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions (2 nd ed.), John Wiley & Sons (2019) Google Scholar
  • C. Tufanaru, Z. Munn, E. Aromataris, J. Campbell, L. Hopp Chapter 3: Systematic reviews of effectiveness E. Aromataris, Z. Munn (Eds.), JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis, JBI (2020), pp. 71-88, 10.46658/JBIMES-20-04 View article View in ScopusGoogle Scholar
Fuente de los datos: Dialnet