New resources ● Members of Qualitative and Implementation conducted a scoping review to understand how patient-reported outcome measures were implemented and used, and their impact in the context of Value-Based Healthcare in PLOS One. ● Members of Bias propose a new approach to evaluating loop inconsistency in network meta-analysis in Statistics in Medicine. ●Members of Comparing Multiple Interventions, Equity, Rapid Reviews and GRADEing compare understanding, accessibility, usability, satisfaction, intention to implement, and preference of adults provided with a digital Plain Language Recommendation format versus the original Standard Language Version in the Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. ● Members of Bias discuss the differences and overlaps between explanatory and pragmatic controlled trials in the Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine. ● Members of Bias, Comparing Multiple Interventions, Statistics, and IPD Meta-analysis introduce the ROB-ME, a new tool for assessing the risk of bias due to missing evidence in systematic reviews with meta-analysis in the BMJ. ● Members of Bias discuss the origins of 'the intention-to-treat principle' to reduce allocation bias in the Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine. ● Members of Equity and GRADEing outline an operationalisation plan for the GRADE-Equity criterion to gather and assess evidence from primary studies within systematic reviews in the Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. ● Members of Economics investigate the extent to which articles of economic evaluations of healthcare interventions indexed in MEDLINE incorporate research practices that promote transparency, openness and reproducibility in the Journal of Clinical Epidemiology.
|