28
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found

      The International Society for Traumatic Stress Studies New Guidelines for the Prevention and Treatment of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder: Methodology and Development Process

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Related collections

          Most cited references36

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn't

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Utilization of the PICO framework to improve searching PubMed for clinical questions

            Background Supporting 21st century health care and the practice of evidence-based medicine (EBM) requires ubiquitous access to clinical information and to knowledge-based resources to answer clinical questions. Many questions go unanswered, however, due to lack of skills in formulating questions, crafting effective search strategies, and accessing databases to identify best levels of evidence. Methods This randomized trial was designed as a pilot study to measure the relevancy of search results using three different interfaces for the PubMed search system. Two of the search interfaces utilized a specific framework called PICO, which was designed to focus clinical questions and to prompt for publication type or type of question asked. The third interface was the standard PubMed interface readily available on the Web. Study subjects were recruited from interns and residents on an inpatient general medicine rotation at an academic medical center in the US. Thirty-one subjects were randomized to one of the three interfaces, given 3 clinical questions, and asked to search PubMed for a set of relevant articles that would provide an answer for each question. The success of the search results was determined by a precision score, which compared the number of relevant or gold standard articles retrieved in a result set to the total number of articles retrieved in that set. Results Participants using the PICO templates (Protocol A or Protocol B) had higher precision scores for each question than the participants who used Protocol C, the standard PubMed Web interface. (Question 1: A = 35%, B = 28%, C = 20%; Question 2: A = 5%, B = 6%, C = 4%; Question 3: A = 1%, B = 0%, C = 0%) 95% confidence intervals were calculated for the precision for each question using a lower boundary of zero. However, the 95% confidence limits were overlapping, suggesting no statistical difference between the groups. Conclusion Due to the small number of searches for each arm, this pilot study could not demonstrate a statistically significant difference between the search protocols. However there was a trend towards higher precision that needs to be investigated in a larger study to determine if PICO can improve the relevancy of search results.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The effects of clinical and statistical heterogeneity on the predictive values of results from meta-analyses.

              Variance between studies in a meta-analysis will exist. This heterogeneity may be of clinical, methodological or statistical origin. The last of these is quantified by the I(2) -statistic. We investigated, using simulated studies, the accuracy of I(2) in the assessment of heterogeneity and the effects of heterogeneity on the predictive value of meta-analyses. The relevance of quantifying I(2) was determined according to the likely presence of heterogeneity between studies (low, high, or unknown) and the calculated I(2) (low or high). The findings were illustrated by published meta-analyses of selective digestive decontamination and weaning protocols. As expected, I(2) increases and the likelihood of drawing correct inferences from a meta-analysis decreases with increasing heterogeneity. With low levels of heterogeneity, I(2) does not appear to be predictive of the accuracy of the meta-analysis result. With high levels of heterogeneity, even meta-analyses with low I(2) -values have low predictive values. Most commonly, the level of heterogeneity in a meta-analysis will be unknown. In these scenarios, I(2) determination may help to identify estimates with low predictive values (high I(2) ). In this situation, the results of a meta-analysis will be unreliable. With low I(2) -values and unknown levels of heterogeneity, predictive values of pooled estimates may range extensively, and findings should be interpreted with caution. In conclusion, quantifying statistical heterogeneity through I(2) -statistics is only helpful when the amount of clinical heterogeneity is unknown and I(2) is high. Objective methods to quantify the levels of clinical and methodological heterogeneity are urgently needed to allow reliable determination of the accuracy of meta-analyses.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Journal of Traumatic Stress
                JOURNAL OF TRAUMATIC STRESS
                Wiley
                0894-9867
                1573-6598
                July 08 2019
                August 2019
                July 08 2019
                August 2019
                : 32
                : 4
                : 475-483
                Affiliations
                [1 ]National Centre for Mental Health, Division of Psychological Medicine and Clinical NeurosciencesCardiff University Cardiff Wales United Kingdom
                [2 ]Harborview Center for Sexual Assault and Traumatic Stress Seattle Washington USA
                [3 ]National Center for PTSD Dissemination and Training Division, Palo Alto VA Healthcare System, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral HealthStanford University Palo Alto California USA
                [4 ]Phoenix Australia–Centre for Posttraumatic Mental Health, Department of PsychiatryUniversity of Melbourne Melbourne Victoria Australia
                [5 ]Department of PsychologyUniversity of Oslo Oslo Norway
                [6 ]Department of PsychologyRyerson University Toronto Canada
                [7 ]Amsterdam University Medical Center, Department of Psychiatry, Amsterdam NeuroscienceUniversity of Amsterdam Amsterdam The Netherlands
                [8 ]Arq Psychotrauma Expert Group Diemen The Netherlands
                [9 ]Division of Psychology and Language SciencesUniversity College London London United Kingdom
                [10 ]Department of Medical and Clinical Psychology (MPS), Hérbert School of MedicineUniformed Services University of the Health Sciences Bethesda Maryland USA
                [11 ]Cardiff & Vale University Health Board Cardiff United Kingdom
                [12 ]Mental Research Institute Palo Alto California USA
                [13 ]EMDR Institute Watsonville CA
                Article
                10.1002/jts.22421
                31283056
                c938bbfb-62dc-47ff-8a83-8b8a25bf1f18
                © 2019

                http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor

                http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/tdm_license_1.1

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article