Evidence Synthesis in Healthcare – a Practical Handbook for Clinicians is the first book to reveal the field of Evidence Synthesis, by combining multiple sources of quantitative/qualitative data to derive the best evidence for use in healthcare. Through the use of clearly explained examples and practical explanations, Evidence Synthesis in Healthcare – a Practical Handbook for Clinicians describes the practical tools, techniques, uses and policy considerations of evidence synthesis techniques in modern healthcare practice.

In the evaluation of healthcare, rigorous methods of quantitative assessment are necessary to establish interventions that are both effective and cost-effective. Usually a single study will not fully address these issues and it is desirable to synthesize evidence from multiple sources. This book aims to provide a practical guide to evidence synthesis for the purpose of decision making, starting with a simple single parameter model, where all studies estimate the same quantity (pairwise meta-analysis) and progressing to more complex multi-parameter structures (including meta-regression, mixed treatment comparisons, Markov models of disease progression, and epidemiology models). A comprehensive, coherent framework is adopted and estimated using Bayesian methods. Key features: A coherent approach to evidence synthesis from multiple sources. Focus is given to Bayesian methods for evidence synthesis that can be integrated within cost-effectiveness analyses in a probabilistic framework using Markov Chain Monte Carlo simulation. Provides methods to statistically combine evidence from a range of evidence structures. Emphasizes the importance of model critique and checking for evidence consistency. Presents numerous worked examples, exercises and solutions drawn from a variety of medical disciplines throughout the book. WinBUGS code is provided for all examples. Evidence Synthesis for Decision Making in Healthcare is intended for health economists, decision modelers, statisticians and others involved in evidence synthesis, health technology assessment, and economic evaluation of health technologies.

Healthcare decision makers in search of reliable information that compares health interventions increasingly turn to systematic reviews for the best summary of the evidence. Systematic reviews identify, select, assess, and synthesize the findings of similar but separate studies, and can help clarify what is known and not known about the potential benefits and harms of drugs, devices, and other healthcare services. Systematic reviews can be helpful for clinicians who want to integrate research findings into their daily practices, for patients to make well-informed choices about their own care, for professional medical societies and other organizations that develop clinical practice guidelines. Too often systematic reviews are of uncertain or poor quality. There are no universally accepted standards for developing systematic reviews leading to variability in how conflicts of interest and biases are handled, how evidence is appraised, and the overall scientific rigor of the process. In Finding What Works in Health Care the Institute of Medicine (IOM) recommends 21 standards for developing high-quality systematic reviews of comparative effectiveness research. The standards address the entire systematic review process from the initial steps of formulating the topic and building the review team to producing a detailed final report that synthesizes what the evidence shows and where knowledge gaps remain. Finding What Works in Health Care also proposes a framework for improving the quality of the science underpinning systematic reviews. This book will serve as a vital resource for both sponsors and producers of systematic reviews of comparative effectiveness research.

Provides a comprehensive overview of range of approaches and methods available for synthesising qualitative and quantitative evidence and an explanation of why this is important. This book looks at different types of review and examining place of synthesis in reviews for policy and management decision making.

How can ethnographic studies be generalized, in contrast to concentrating on the individual case? Noblit and Hare propose a new method for synthesizing from qualitative studies: meta-ethnography. After citing the criteria to be used in comparing qualitative research projects, the authors define the ways these can then be aggregated to create more cogent syntheses of research. Using examples from numerous studies ranging from ethnographic work in educational settings to the Mead-Freeman controversy over Samoan youth, Meta-Ethnography offers useful procedural advice from both comparative and cumulative analyses of qualitative data. This provocative volume will be read with interest by researchers and students in qualitative research methods, ethnography, education, sociology, and anthropology. "After defining metaphor and synthesis, these authors provide a step-by-step program that will allow the researcher to show similarity (reciprocal translation), difference (refutation), or similarity at a higher level (lines or argument synthesis) among sample studies....Contain(s) valuable strategies at a seldom-used level of analysis." --Contemporary Sociology "The authors made an important contribution by reframing how we think of ethnography comparison in a way that is compatible with the new developments in interpretive ethnography. Meta-Ethnography is well worth consulting for the problem definition it offers." --The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease "This book had to be written and I am pleased it was. Someone needed to break the ice and offer a strategy for summarizing multiple ethnographic studies. Noblit and Hare have done a commendable job of giving the research community one approach for doing so. Further, no one else can now venture into this area of synthesizing qualitative studies without making references to and positioning themselves vis-a-vis this volume." -Educational Studies

"Practitioners and patients are called upon to make numerous health care decisions and, in doing so, need to weigh various types of information before taking action. This information comes from a myriad of sources, including the results of well-designed research; information related to the preferences of patients/clients and their relevant others; the practitioner{u2019}s own experiences; and the nature and norms of the setting and culture in which the care is being delivered. Methods to synthesize qualitative evidence are now emerging and this text examines the methodological bases to qualitative synthesis and describes the processes involved in the conduct of a rigorous synthesis of qualitative evidence, with a particular focus on Meta-Aggregation."--[source inconnue].

Over the past two decades, there has been a major increase in research into the effects of the arts on health and well-being, alongside developments in practice and policy activities in different countries across the WHO European Region and further afield. This report synthesizes the global evidence on the role of the arts in improving health and well-being, with a specific focus on the WHO European Region. Results from over 3000 studies identified a major role for the arts in the prevention of ill health, promotion of health, and management and treatment of illness across the lifespan. The reviewed evidence included study designs such as uncontrolled pilot studies, case studies, small-scale cross-sectional surveys, nationally representative longitudinal cohort studies, community-wide ethnographies and randomized controlled trials from diverse disciplines. The beneficial impact of the arts could be furthered through acknowledging and acting on the growing evidence base; promoting arts engagement at the individual, local and national levels; and supporting cross-sectoral collaboration.