Advanced search    

Search: authors:"Iain Chalmers"

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

Educational interventions to improve people’s understanding of key concepts in assessing the effects of health interventions: a systematic review

Health information is readily accessible but is of variable quality. General knowledge about how to assess whether claims about health interventions are trustworthy is not common, so people’s health decisions can be ill-informed, unnecessarily costly and even unsafe. This review aims to identify and evaluate studies of educational interventions designed to improve people’s...

Educational interventions to improve people’s understanding of key concepts in assessing the effects of health interventions: a systematic review protocol

Background Health information has become readily accessible through mass media, and people are playing a more active and autonomous role in their health. Much of the health information that was previously only available to health professionals is now directly accessible to the public. Consequently, people often navigate vast amounts of health information on their own, typically...

The UK Medical Research Council and clinical trials, 1934-1960

Iain Chalmers James Lind Initiative, Oxford, UK The UK Medical Research Council (MRC) is 100 years old this year. Its 'Centenary Timeline' contains the following brief reference to the Council's

Accumulating Research: A Systematic Account of How Cumulative Meta-Analyses Would Have Provided Knowledge, Improved Health, Reduced Harm and Saved Resources

Background “Cumulative meta-analysis” describes a statistical procedure to calculate, retrospectively, summary estimates from the results of similar trials every time the results of a further trial in the series had become available. In the early 1990s, comparisons of cumulative meta-analyses of treatments for myocardial infarction with advice promulgated through medical...

Establishing a library of resources to help people understand key concepts in assessing treatment claims—The “Critical thinking and Appraisal Resource Library” (CARL)

-resources. (DOCX) Author Contributions Conceptualization: John C. Castle, Iain Chalmers, Patricia Atkinson, Douglas Badenoch, Andrew D. Oxman, Astrid Austvoll-Dahlgren, L. Kendall Krause, Amanda Burls, Paul ... Glasziou. Data curation: John C. Castle, Iain Chalmers, Patricia Atkinson, Douglas Badenoch. Formal analysis: John C. Castle. Funding acquisition: Iain Chalmers. Investigation: John C. Castle, Astrid

Intervention Synthesis: A Missing Link between a Systematic Review and Practical Treatment(s)

Paul Glasziou and colleagues discuss methods to guide selection of an intervention from individual trials within a systematic review. Please see later in the article for the Editors' Summary

Data sharing among data monitoring committees and responsibilities to patients and science

Over the past three decades it has become increasingly recognized that systematic assessment of as high a proportion as possible of relevant research evidence is needed to protect the best interests of patients and the public. For example, this principle is manifested in clinical guidelines and, increasingly, in the design and monitoring of new research. For scientific and...

A European multi-language initiative to make the general population aware of independent clinical research: the European Communication on Research Awareness Need project

Mosconi 0 Gerd Antes Giorgio Barbareschi Amanda Burls Jacques Demotes-Mainard Iain Chalmers Cinzia Colombo 0 Silvio Garattini 0 Christian Gluud Gill Gyte Catherine Mcllwain Matt Penfold Nils Post Roberto

Seventy-Five Trials and Eleven Systematic Reviews a Day: How Will We Ever Keep Up?

Hilda Bastian and colleagues examine the extent to which critical summaries of clinical trials can be used by health professionals and the public.

PRISMA for Abstracts: Reporting Systematic Reviews in Journal and Conference Abstracts

Elaine Beller and colleagues from the PRISMA for Abstracts group provide a reporting guidelines for reporting abstracts of systematic reviews in journals and at conferences.

Current Controlled Trials: an opportunity to help improve the quality of clinical research

Some problems with the quality of controlled clinical trials can be addressed by following these procedures: registering all trials at inception; using systematic reviews to inform the design of new studies; posting and obtaining feedback on preprints; reporting all well conducted trials, regardless of their results; reducing biased and inefficient assessment of reports submitted...

Making randomised trials more efficient: report of the first meeting to discuss the Trial Forge platform

Randomised trials are at the heart of evidence-based healthcare, but the methods and infrastructure for conducting these sometimes complex studies are largely evidence free. Trial Forge (www.trialforge.org) is an initiative that aims to increase the evidence base for trial decision making and, in doing so, to improve trial efficiency. This paper summarises a one-day workshop held...