Article type
Year
Abstract
Background:
Many researchers have difficulties understanding study methods and this can lead to uncertainties about the conclusions presented. Increasing knowledge about methodological aspects of studies is helpful for understanding and appraising the internal validity in scientific research critically.
Objectives:
We describe the experience of creating a group to promote the discussion of methodological issues in scientific studies.
Methods:
In June 2013, collaborators from the Brazilian Cochrane Centre (BCC) voluntarily decided to create a study group to improve their capacity to assess the methods of studies critically. The BECA Group (Brazilian Evidence-based Critical Appraisal Group) started meeting weekly at Universidade Federal de São Paulo for two-hour study and discussion sessions. The meetings were broadcast through Skype so that interested participants from other Brazilian cities and from Chile could join the discussions.
Results:
From June 2013 to March 2014, we promoted 26 meetings that addressed the following topics: Cochrane 'Risk of bias' table, stepped-wedge study design, the AMSTAR tool, the Dows and Black tool, network meta-analysis, validation methods, validation and translation methods, confidence intervals, equivalence and non-inferiority studies, Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) tables, publication bias, funnel plot graphs and good clinical practice recommendations. An average of 10 researchers participated in each meeting (range 7 to 16). The discussion of the stepped-wedge methodology led to a publication in a peer-reviewed journal. Other publications arising from the discussions are ongoing. The vast majority of the participants were satisfied with the experience of the BECA group and would recommend it to their peers.
Conclusions:
The meetings led to increased knowledge about methodological aspects of studies and helped participants to improve their critical appraisal of scientific publications. The group is ongoing and seeking to increase the number of participants.
Many researchers have difficulties understanding study methods and this can lead to uncertainties about the conclusions presented. Increasing knowledge about methodological aspects of studies is helpful for understanding and appraising the internal validity in scientific research critically.
Objectives:
We describe the experience of creating a group to promote the discussion of methodological issues in scientific studies.
Methods:
In June 2013, collaborators from the Brazilian Cochrane Centre (BCC) voluntarily decided to create a study group to improve their capacity to assess the methods of studies critically. The BECA Group (Brazilian Evidence-based Critical Appraisal Group) started meeting weekly at Universidade Federal de São Paulo for two-hour study and discussion sessions. The meetings were broadcast through Skype so that interested participants from other Brazilian cities and from Chile could join the discussions.
Results:
From June 2013 to March 2014, we promoted 26 meetings that addressed the following topics: Cochrane 'Risk of bias' table, stepped-wedge study design, the AMSTAR tool, the Dows and Black tool, network meta-analysis, validation methods, validation and translation methods, confidence intervals, equivalence and non-inferiority studies, Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) tables, publication bias, funnel plot graphs and good clinical practice recommendations. An average of 10 researchers participated in each meeting (range 7 to 16). The discussion of the stepped-wedge methodology led to a publication in a peer-reviewed journal. Other publications arising from the discussions are ongoing. The vast majority of the participants were satisfied with the experience of the BECA group and would recommend it to their peers.
Conclusions:
The meetings led to increased knowledge about methodological aspects of studies and helped participants to improve their critical appraisal of scientific publications. The group is ongoing and seeking to increase the number of participants.