Article type
Year
Abstract
Background:
Results of isolated randomized controlled trials and observational studies are frequently contradicted by subsequent studies and this leaves healthcare professionals in a dilemma when selecting best evidence for their clinical queries.
Objectives:
To investigate the sources of knowledge commonly used by Cochrane authors in developing countries for best treatment/evidence for their clinical queries.
Methods:
A well structured questionnaire was developed regarding uncertainty in selecting best evidence and sources of knowledge use to support decisions. An online survey was conducted by mailing the questionnaire to Cochrane authors of developing countries, selected on the basis of the World Bank country-classification in 2013. Replies from the authors were recorded and analyzed to attain the objectives.
Results:
A total of 258 Cochrane authors responded to the survey. The majority of authors (44%) expressed that occasionally in the past month they had faced uncertainty about the best treatment/evidence for a clinical query. To support their decisions, the majority of authors often use other types of systematic reviews (43%), followed by Cochrane systematic reviews (41%), individual research studies (33%), text books (25%), guidelines from their organization (24%), suggestions from senior colleagues (22%), local ministry of health guidelines (21%), personal experience (21%), reviews that are not systematic (16%), and conference abstracts (9%). Interestingly, about 28% of authors mentioned that they always use Cochrane Reviews as sources of knowledge to support their decisions and only 2% authors never use Cochrane Reviews.
Conclusions:
Findings of this survey revealed that Cochrane authors from developing countries commonly use Cochrane and other types of systematic reviews as best evidence for their clinical queries.
Results of isolated randomized controlled trials and observational studies are frequently contradicted by subsequent studies and this leaves healthcare professionals in a dilemma when selecting best evidence for their clinical queries.
Objectives:
To investigate the sources of knowledge commonly used by Cochrane authors in developing countries for best treatment/evidence for their clinical queries.
Methods:
A well structured questionnaire was developed regarding uncertainty in selecting best evidence and sources of knowledge use to support decisions. An online survey was conducted by mailing the questionnaire to Cochrane authors of developing countries, selected on the basis of the World Bank country-classification in 2013. Replies from the authors were recorded and analyzed to attain the objectives.
Results:
A total of 258 Cochrane authors responded to the survey. The majority of authors (44%) expressed that occasionally in the past month they had faced uncertainty about the best treatment/evidence for a clinical query. To support their decisions, the majority of authors often use other types of systematic reviews (43%), followed by Cochrane systematic reviews (41%), individual research studies (33%), text books (25%), guidelines from their organization (24%), suggestions from senior colleagues (22%), local ministry of health guidelines (21%), personal experience (21%), reviews that are not systematic (16%), and conference abstracts (9%). Interestingly, about 28% of authors mentioned that they always use Cochrane Reviews as sources of knowledge to support their decisions and only 2% authors never use Cochrane Reviews.
Conclusions:
Findings of this survey revealed that Cochrane authors from developing countries commonly use Cochrane and other types of systematic reviews as best evidence for their clinical queries.