Enhancing methodological developments for Cochrane Public Health Reviews: the role of exemplar reviews
The need to ensure that Cochrane reviews are of most use to stakeholders has never been more poignant than it is now The call for members of The Cochrane Collaboration to address the evidence needs of stakeholders globally1 & the health determinants focus of the Public Health Review Group (PHRG)...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of public health (Oxford, England) England), 2009-12, Vol.31 (4), p.593-595 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 595 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 4 |
| container_start_page | 593 |
| container_title | Journal of public health (Oxford, England) |
| container_volume | 31 |
| creator | Armstrong, Rebecca Doyle, Jodie Saith, Ruhi Anderson, Laurie |
| description | The need to ensure that Cochrane reviews are of most use to stakeholders has never been more poignant than it is now The call for members of The Cochrane Collaboration to address the evidence needs of stakeholders globally1 & the health determinants focus of the Public Health Review Group (PHRG) has highlighted the need for methods & processes that meet these needs. Changes to methodology, which includes expanding study design inclusion, needs to be well thought out & grounded in the practicalities of the review production process itself. These methodological expansions arc essential to avoid wherever possible the outcome of an 'empty review'. Hence the value of 'exemplar reviews' to inform & help shape innovative but equally rigorous methods for conducting reviews of complex interventions-in this case, reviews of interventions addressing the upstream determinants of health for population level health & related outcomes. Adapted from the source document. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1093/pubmed/fdp100 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_733675194</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>45157871</jstor_id><oup_id>10.1093/pubmed/fdp100</oup_id><sourcerecordid>45157871</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c372t-da2aef48847fa20d21d95cb9f1d5626fa5a1369b9575317fb4cc9e83f00d23263</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqF0Utv1DAUBWCrArWldMkS5FVhE-pHHMfdlVHpIFVigFaqurEc57pJceJgJ6X8e4IyGnawsuX76ejKB6FXlLynRPHTYao6qE9dPVBC9tAhlTnNeCnIs909ZwfoRUoPhDDFiNhHB1Qpzimjh8hd9I3pbdvf4w7GJtTBh_vWGo9reAQfhg76MWEXIl4F20TTA95MlW8tXoPxY4O_wmMLP9MZHhvAMXjAwWF4gm7wJuK4TF-i5874BMfb8wjdfLy4Xq2zq8-Xn1bnV5nlko1ZbZgBl5dlLp1hpGa0VsJWytFaFKxwRhjKC1UpIQWn0lW5tQpK7shsOSv4EXq75A4x_JggjbprkwXv573DlLTkvJCCqnyWJ_-UQnLGCSlnmC3QxpBSBKeH2HYm_tKU6D8V6KUCvVQw-zfb4OV5p7d_PoN3CwjT8N-s1wt9SGOIO5wLKmQp6d_d2jTC025u4nddSC6FXt_e6W-3G3H55UOuN_w3_l2rhQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>57323008</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Enhancing methodological developments for Cochrane Public Health Reviews: the role of exemplar reviews</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA)</source><source>JSTOR Archive Collection A-Z Listing</source><source>Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current)</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Armstrong, Rebecca ; Doyle, Jodie ; Saith, Ruhi ; Anderson, Laurie</creator><creatorcontrib>Armstrong, Rebecca ; Doyle, Jodie ; Saith, Ruhi ; Anderson, Laurie</creatorcontrib><description>The need to ensure that Cochrane reviews are of most use to stakeholders has never been more poignant than it is now The call for members of The Cochrane Collaboration to address the evidence needs of stakeholders globally1 & the health determinants focus of the Public Health Review Group (PHRG) has highlighted the need for methods & processes that meet these needs. Changes to methodology, which includes expanding study design inclusion, needs to be well thought out & grounded in the practicalities of the review production process itself. These methodological expansions arc essential to avoid wherever possible the outcome of an 'empty review'. Hence the value of 'exemplar reviews' to inform & help shape innovative but equally rigorous methods for conducting reviews of complex interventions-in this case, reviews of interventions addressing the upstream determinants of health for population level health & related outcomes. Adapted from the source document.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1741-3842</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1741-3850</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1093/pubmed/fdp100</identifier><identifier>PMID: 19933121</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Oxford University Press</publisher><subject>Cochrane Collaboration ; Cochrane Update ; Evidence-Based Medicine ; Guidelines as Topic ; Health ; Interventions ; Methodology ; Public health ; Review Literature as Topic ; Stakeholders ; United Kingdom</subject><ispartof>Journal of public health (Oxford, England), 2009-12, Vol.31 (4), p.593-595</ispartof><rights>Faculty of Public Health 2009</rights><rights>The Author 2009, Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Faculty of Public Health. All rights reserved 2009</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/45157871$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/45157871$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,803,1583,27922,27923,30998,58015,58248</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19933121$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Armstrong, Rebecca</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Doyle, Jodie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Saith, Ruhi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Anderson, Laurie</creatorcontrib><title>Enhancing methodological developments for Cochrane Public Health Reviews: the role of exemplar reviews</title><title>Journal of public health (Oxford, England)</title><addtitle>J Public Health (Oxf)</addtitle><description>The need to ensure that Cochrane reviews are of most use to stakeholders has never been more poignant than it is now The call for members of The Cochrane Collaboration to address the evidence needs of stakeholders globally1 & the health determinants focus of the Public Health Review Group (PHRG) has highlighted the need for methods & processes that meet these needs. Changes to methodology, which includes expanding study design inclusion, needs to be well thought out & grounded in the practicalities of the review production process itself. These methodological expansions arc essential to avoid wherever possible the outcome of an 'empty review'. Hence the value of 'exemplar reviews' to inform & help shape innovative but equally rigorous methods for conducting reviews of complex interventions-in this case, reviews of interventions addressing the upstream determinants of health for population level health & related outcomes. Adapted from the source document.</description><subject>Cochrane Collaboration</subject><subject>Cochrane Update</subject><subject>Evidence-Based Medicine</subject><subject>Guidelines as Topic</subject><subject>Health</subject><subject>Interventions</subject><subject>Methodology</subject><subject>Public health</subject><subject>Review Literature as Topic</subject><subject>Stakeholders</subject><subject>United Kingdom</subject><issn>1741-3842</issn><issn>1741-3850</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2009</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>7QJ</sourceid><recordid>eNqF0Utv1DAUBWCrArWldMkS5FVhE-pHHMfdlVHpIFVigFaqurEc57pJceJgJ6X8e4IyGnawsuX76ejKB6FXlLynRPHTYao6qE9dPVBC9tAhlTnNeCnIs909ZwfoRUoPhDDFiNhHB1Qpzimjh8hd9I3pbdvf4w7GJtTBh_vWGo9reAQfhg76MWEXIl4F20TTA95MlW8tXoPxY4O_wmMLP9MZHhvAMXjAwWF4gm7wJuK4TF-i5874BMfb8wjdfLy4Xq2zq8-Xn1bnV5nlko1ZbZgBl5dlLp1hpGa0VsJWytFaFKxwRhjKC1UpIQWn0lW5tQpK7shsOSv4EXq75A4x_JggjbprkwXv573DlLTkvJCCqnyWJ_-UQnLGCSlnmC3QxpBSBKeH2HYm_tKU6D8V6KUCvVQw-zfb4OV5p7d_PoN3CwjT8N-s1wt9SGOIO5wLKmQp6d_d2jTC025u4nddSC6FXt_e6W-3G3H55UOuN_w3_l2rhQ</recordid><startdate>200912</startdate><enddate>200912</enddate><creator>Armstrong, Rebecca</creator><creator>Doyle, Jodie</creator><creator>Saith, Ruhi</creator><creator>Anderson, Laurie</creator><general>Oxford University Press</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QJ</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>200912</creationdate><title>Enhancing methodological developments for Cochrane Public Health Reviews: the role of exemplar reviews</title><author>Armstrong, Rebecca ; Doyle, Jodie ; Saith, Ruhi ; Anderson, Laurie</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c372t-da2aef48847fa20d21d95cb9f1d5626fa5a1369b9575317fb4cc9e83f00d23263</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2009</creationdate><topic>Cochrane Collaboration</topic><topic>Cochrane Update</topic><topic>Evidence-Based Medicine</topic><topic>Guidelines as Topic</topic><topic>Health</topic><topic>Interventions</topic><topic>Methodology</topic><topic>Public health</topic><topic>Review Literature as Topic</topic><topic>Stakeholders</topic><topic>United Kingdom</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Armstrong, Rebecca</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Doyle, Jodie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Saith, Ruhi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Anderson, Laurie</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA)</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of public health (Oxford, England)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Armstrong, Rebecca</au><au>Doyle, Jodie</au><au>Saith, Ruhi</au><au>Anderson, Laurie</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Enhancing methodological developments for Cochrane Public Health Reviews: the role of exemplar reviews</atitle><jtitle>Journal of public health (Oxford, England)</jtitle><addtitle>J Public Health (Oxf)</addtitle><date>2009-12</date><risdate>2009</risdate><volume>31</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>593</spage><epage>595</epage><pages>593-595</pages><issn>1741-3842</issn><eissn>1741-3850</eissn><abstract>The need to ensure that Cochrane reviews are of most use to stakeholders has never been more poignant than it is now The call for members of The Cochrane Collaboration to address the evidence needs of stakeholders globally1 & the health determinants focus of the Public Health Review Group (PHRG) has highlighted the need for methods & processes that meet these needs. Changes to methodology, which includes expanding study design inclusion, needs to be well thought out & grounded in the practicalities of the review production process itself. These methodological expansions arc essential to avoid wherever possible the outcome of an 'empty review'. Hence the value of 'exemplar reviews' to inform & help shape innovative but equally rigorous methods for conducting reviews of complex interventions-in this case, reviews of interventions addressing the upstream determinants of health for population level health & related outcomes. Adapted from the source document.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Oxford University Press</pub><pmid>19933121</pmid><doi>10.1093/pubmed/fdp100</doi><tpages>3</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 1741-3842 |
| ispartof | Journal of public health (Oxford, England), 2009-12, Vol.31 (4), p.593-595 |
| issn | 1741-3842 1741-3850 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_733675194 |
| source | MEDLINE; Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA); JSTOR Archive Collection A-Z Listing; Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current); Alma/SFX Local Collection |
| subjects | Cochrane Collaboration Cochrane Update Evidence-Based Medicine Guidelines as Topic Health Interventions Methodology Public health Review Literature as Topic Stakeholders United Kingdom |
| title | Enhancing methodological developments for Cochrane Public Health Reviews: the role of exemplar reviews |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-14T04%3A39%3A47IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Enhancing%20methodological%20developments%20for%20Cochrane%20Public%20Health%20Reviews:%20the%20role%20of%20exemplar%20reviews&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20public%20health%20(Oxford,%20England)&rft.au=Armstrong,%20Rebecca&rft.date=2009-12&rft.volume=31&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=593&rft.epage=595&rft.pages=593-595&rft.issn=1741-3842&rft.eissn=1741-3850&rft_id=info:doi/10.1093/pubmed/fdp100&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E45157871%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=57323008&rft_id=info:pmid/19933121&rft_jstor_id=45157871&rft_oup_id=10.1093/pubmed/fdp100&rfr_iscdi=true |