Cochrane overviews: how can we optimize their impact on evidence-based rehabilitation?

被引:6
|
作者
Pollock, Alex [1 ]
van Wijck, Frederike [2 ]
机构
[1] Glasgow Caledonian Univ, Nursing Midwifery & Allied Hlth Profess NMAHP Res, 6th Floor,Govan Mbeki Bldg, Glasgow G4 0BA, Lanark, Scotland
[2] Glasgow Caledonian Univ, Sch Hlth & Life Sci, Glasgow, Lanark, Scotland
关键词
Rehabilitation; Evidence-based practice; Evidence-based medicine; Review; Systematic review as topic; Literature review as topic; SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS; KNOWLEDGE TRANSLATION; CONDUCTING OVERVIEWS; EVIDENCE MAP; CHALLENGES; HEALTH; CARE; INTERVENTIONS; METHODOLOGY; GUIDANCE;
D O I
10.23736/S1973-9087.19.05780-0
中图分类号
R49 [康复医学];
学科分类号
100215 ;
摘要
INTRODUCTION: Overviews (i.e. reviews of multiple systematic reviews) comprise a relatively novel methodology to systematically synthesize research findings. Overviews aim for a beneficial impact on clinical practice, but their methods and pathways to impact have so far not been mapped. The aim of this paper was to inform recommendations for optimizing impact on rehabilitation practice and research by mapping methods and pathways to impact in Cochrane overviews relevant to rehabilitation. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: We systematically searched and identified published Cochrane overviews (to June 2018) relevant to rehabilitation. We extracted data and compared overviews on key characteristics, methods of evidence synthesis, statements about impact, and access metrics. We explored one overview in detail regarding beneficiaries, activities and outputs, mapped potential pathways to impact, and, using an iterative process, refined this into a generic map. Through exploration of all synthesized data, we propose further recommendations for planning, conducting and reporting of future overviews in order to optimize impact on rehabilitation. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: We identified seven Cochrane overviews relevant to rehabilitation. Their focus and methods varied, but they were broadly related to rehabilitation interventions for populations of people with diverse long-term conditions. Overviews also varied regarding their intended impact; only 4 overviews identified specific beneficiaries. All overviews included multiple tables and figures, but only one synthesized key findings into a single figure. For five overviews, the Altmetric Attention Score (a weighted count of attention that an output receives based on a range of online sources) was in the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric. The overview within our worked example had four key impact goals, each with different beneficiaries and required actions; this example led to a generic map of potential pathways to impact for other overviews. CONCLUSIONS: Cochrane overviews have the potential to play a key role in knowledge translation and therefore to be useful in supporting evidence-based rehabilitation practice. However, current overviews relating to rehabilitation differ in methods, approaches and intended impact, and sometimes fall short of promoting easy access to key information for beneficiaries. Future Cochrane overviews should address topics of importance to key beneficiaries and clearly outline potential pathways to impact in order to have a potential beneficial impact on evidence-based rehabilitation and to improve rehabilitation outcomes.
引用
收藏
页码:395 / 410
页数:16
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] HOW CAN WE HELP PEOPLE WITH FIBROMYALGIA? NO EFFECTS OF AN EVIDENCE-BASED MULTICOMPONENT REHABILITATION PROGRAMME
    Zangi, H. A.
    Haugmark, T.
    Provan, S. A.
    Smedslund, G.
    Hagen, K. B.
    ANNALS OF THE RHEUMATIC DISEASES, 2020, 79 : 96 - 97
  • [2] How can we improve the use of essential evidence-based interventions?
    José M Belizán
    Natasha Salaria
    Pilar Valanzasca
    Michael Mbizvo
    Reproductive Health, 11
  • [3] How can we improve the use of essential evidence-based interventions?
    Belizan, Jose M.
    Salaria, Natasha
    Valanzasca, Pilar
    Mbizvo, Michael
    REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH, 2014, 11
  • [4] Why do we need Evidence-Based Methods in Cochrane?
    McKenzie, Joanne E.
    Clarke, Mike J.
    Chandler, Jackie
    COCHRANE DATABASE OF SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS, 2015, (07):
  • [5] Evidence-based medicine in older patients: how can we do better?
    Mooijaart, S. P.
    Broekhuizen, K.
    Trompet, S.
    de Craen, A. J. M.
    Gussekloo, J.
    Oleksik, A.
    van Heemst, D.
    Blauw, G. J.
    Muller, M.
    NETHERLANDS JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 2015, 73 (05): : 211 - 218
  • [6] How Confident Can We Be in the Reporting of Evidence-Based Diagnostic Validity Statistics?
    Macleod, L.
    Bowden, S.
    ARCHIVES OF CLINICAL NEUROPSYCHOLOGY, 2010, 25 (06) : 539 - 539
  • [7] Evidence-based medicine: can we trust the evidence?
    不详
    VETERINARY RECORD, 2013, 173 (22) : 540 - 540
  • [8] Twenty years of the Cochrane Collaboration: Impact on evidence-based nursing
    Bonnel, Galadriel
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF NURSE PRACTITIONERS, 2013, 25 (12) : 633 - 633
  • [9] How to practice and teach evidence-based medicine: Role of the Cochrane Collaboration
    Kleijnen, J
    Chalmers, I
    ACTA ANAESTHESIOLOGICA SCANDINAVICA, 1997, 41 : 231 - 233
  • [10] Informing physiotherapy decisions with reliable evidence: how physiotherapists have contributed to Cochrane and how Cochrane has informed evidence-based physiotherapy
    Green, Sally
    McDonald, Steve
    Holland, Anne E.
    Elkins, Mark
    JOURNAL OF PHYSIOTHERAPY, 2014, 60 (01) : 1 - 4