Advanced search    

Search: authors:"Mike Clarke"

7 papers found.
Use AND, OR, NOT, +word, -word, "long phrase", (parentheses) to fine-tune your search.

Core outcome sets and systematic reviews

Systematic reviews seek to bring together research evidence to answer the question for the review. The reviewers usually wish to compare, contrast and, if appropriate, combine the findings of the existing research studies. However, these intentions are often thwarted by inconsistencies in the outcomes that were measured and reported in the individual studies. This, in turn, makes...

Impact of non-pharmacological interventions on prevention and treatment of delirium in critically ill patients: protocol for a systematic review of quantitative and qualitative research

Background Critically ill patients have an increased risk of developing delirium during their intensive care stay. To date, pharmacological interventions have not been shown to be effective for delirium management but non-pharmacological interventions have shown some promise. The aim of this systematic review is to identify effective non-pharmacological interventions for reducing...

Towards core outcome set (COS) development: a follow-up descriptive survey of outcomes in Cochrane reviews

Background A core outcome set (COS) can address problems of outcome heterogeneity and outcome reporting bias in trials and systematic reviews, including Cochrane reviews, helping to reduce waste. One of the aims of the international Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) Initiative is to link the development and use of COS with the outcomes specified and reported...

Do Cochrane summaries help student midwives understand the findings of Cochrane systematic reviews: the BRIEF randomised trial

0 2 Toby Lasserson 1 Elaine Beller Margaret Carroll Vanora Hundley Judith Sunderland Declan Devane Jane Noyes Susan Key Sarah Norris Janine Wyn-Davies Mike Clarke 0 School of Nursing and Midwifery ... practice; OSCEs: objective structured clinical examinations; OR: odds ratio; RD: risk difference; 95 % CI: 95 % confidence interval. Competing interests Fiona Alderdice, Mike Clarke, Toby Lasserson, Declan

Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement

for Healthcare Research and Quality (Rockville, USA); Mike Clarke, Queen’s University of Belfast (Belfast, Ireland); Tammy Clifford, Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (CADTH) (Ottawa

PROSPERO at one year: an evaluation of its utility

Background PROSPERO, an international prospective register of systematic review protocols in health and social care, was launched in February 2011. After one year of operation we describe access and use, explore user experience and identify areas for future improvement. Methods We collated administrative data and web statistics and conducted an online survey of users’ experiences...

The nuts and bolts of PROSPERO: an international prospective register of systematic reviews

Systematic Reviews The nuts and bolts prospective register Booth et al. Alison Booth Mike Clarke Gordon Dooley Davina Ghersi David Moher Mark Petticrew Lesley Stewart - of PROSPERO: an