• Using science, technology, innovation and partnerships to accelerate development outcomes: Identifying priorities for new evidence generation and synthesis 2017 Cape Town [Global Evidence Summit]
• Using search narratives to explain literature search strategies: a worked example 2018 Edinburgh
• Using simple microsimulation to estimate risk difference from a meta-analysis 2023 London
• Using social media and crowdsourcing to gather important publications for a scoping review about wikis and collaborative writing tools 2013 Québec City
• Using social media as evidence in an Evidence Gap Map on Topical Steroid Withdrawal Syndrome: Challenges and considerations 2024 Prague [Global Evidence Summit]
• Using social media for effective communication 2016 Seoul
• Using social media for effective communication with Cochrane stakeholders 2014 Hyderabad
• Using social media for effective communication with Cochrane stakeholders 2013 Québec City
• Using social media for effective communication with Cochrane stakeholders 2015 Vienna
• Using social media platforms to disseminate Cochrane evidence in China 2019 Santiago
• Using social media to disseminate translated Cochrane evidence and to promote high-quality health information in non-English speaking regions 2015 Vienna
• Using SWIFT-Active Screener to reduce the expense of evidence-based toxicology 2019 Santiago
• Using SWIFT-Active Screener to reduce the expense of evidence-based toxicology 2020 Abstracts
• Using systematic review methods to assess the evidence on performance of measurement instruments in wound care 2005 Melbourne
• Using systematic reviews and prescribing data to analyse off-label drugs use: the case of antiemetics for gastroenteritis in children 2009 Singapore
• Using systematic reviews to derive science-based products for HIV prevention 2000 Cape Town
• Using systematic reviews to formulate research recommendations 2016 Seoul
• Using systematic reviews to identify the essential components of interventions: the example of parenting 2017 Cape Town [Global Evidence Summit]
• Using systematic reviews to inform evidence on acceptability, feasibility, and equity in Evidence to Decision frameworks 2024 Prague [Global Evidence Summit]
• Using systematic reviews to make decisions about research: moving beyond health science 2024 Prague [Global Evidence Summit]
• Using systematic reviews to study adverse drug reactions: The example of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia 2011 Madrid
• Using systematically synthesised evidence to inform the funding of new clinical trials - the UK Medical Research Council approach 1998 Baltimore
• Using technology to make the Evidence Ecosystem more efficient and effective: global collaborations for interoperability 2024 Prague [Global Evidence Summit]
• Using text mining technologies can reduce screening workload in systematic reviews in practice as well as in theory 2014 Hyderabad
• Using text mining to facilitate policy relevant systematic reviews 2010 Keystone
• Using text-mining to develop a U.S.-specific geographic search filter to facilitate systematic reviews in Ovid MEDLINE 2020 Abstracts
• Using the adjusted indirect comparison in a Health Technology Assessment (HTA): clopidogrel versus modified-release dipyridamole 2004 Ottawa
• Using the AMSTAR checklist for network meta-analysis: does it fit? 2016 Seoul
• Using the AMSTAR checklist for rapid reviews – does it fit? 2015 Vienna
• Using the capture-recapture technique in systematic literature searches 1996 Adelaide
• Using the Cochrane community site to support Cochrane work 2013 Québec City
• Using the Cochrane Controlled Clinical Trials Register (CENTRAL) to Identify Clinical Trials in Selected Medical Fields 1999 Rome
• Using the Cochrane RCT 'Risk of bias' tool in systematic reviews 2015 Vienna
• Using the Cochrane Register of Studies to identify the evidence gaps in Cochrane systematic reviews 2018 Edinburgh
• Using the Cochrane Register of Studies to studify your Specialised Register 2012 Auckland
• Using the Cochrane risk of bias tool in systematic reviews 2014 Hyderabad
• Using the consultation and scoping process to inform the ‘Implications for research’ section: an example from a suite of Cochrane Reviews on chronic suppurative otitis media 2019 Santiago
• Using the Delphi method to construct a system for grading the quality of evidence for public health decision-making 2024 Prague [Global Evidence Summit]
• Using the findings of 'views' studies to explore the findings of effectiveness studies in systematic reviews 2005 Melbourne
• Using the Global Burden of Disease database to inform priority setting 2015 Vienna
• Using the Global Burden of Disease database to inform priority setting decisions 2016 Seoul
• Using the GRADE approach to develop guidelines in low income countries: views of guideline panelists in Kenya 2014 Hyderabad
• Using the GRADE approach to network meta-analysis 2015 Vienna
• Using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations approach to report the conclusions in a non-inferiority randomized clinical trial. 2023 London
• Using the Medical Research Council framework for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of complex interventions to identify and develop strategies to promote effective professional practice 2005 Melbourne
• Using the new Cochrane Style Guide 2008 Freiburg
• Using the new online GRADEpro to create 'Summary of findings' tables 2015 Vienna
• Using the new online GRADEpro to create summary of findings tables ***in computer lab; no need for personal laptops 2013 Québec City
• Using the new online software, GDT, to create 'Summary of findings' tables 2014 Hyderabad
• Using the online GRADEpro to create 'Summary of findings' tables 2016 Seoul
• Using the online GRADEpro to create 'Summary of findings' tables (in Spanish) 2019 Santiago
• Using the online GRADEpro to create 'Summary of findings’ tables and patient-friendly tools 2019 Santiago
• Using the results of a qualitative systematic review for quantitative instrument validation 2017 Cape Town [Global Evidence Summit]
• Using the results of systematic reviews, overviews of systematic reviews, and network meta-analyses to inform clinical practice guideline recommendations 2019 Santiago
• Using the RobotAnalyst text-mining application to boost efficiency of literature screening: experience from a systematic review in health services research 2017 Cape Town [Global Evidence Summit]
• Using the smallest worthwhile difference to interpret clinical evidence 2024 Prague [Global Evidence Summit]
• Using the TRANSFER framework for assessing transferability of review findings – a case study 2017 Cape Town [Global Evidence Summit]
• Using the Vote Cards to Encourage Active Participation and to Improve Critical Appraisal Skills in Evidence-Based Medicine Journal Clubs 2010 Keystone
• Using Theory of Change to Assess Impact of Knowledge Translation Initiatives 2020 Abstracts
• Using theory of change to assess impact of knowledge translation initiatives 2019 Santiago
• Using theory to guide synthesis of qualitative research: why, how and what would this mean for me? 2014 Hyderabad
• Using theory to inform evidence synthesis : a case study of school accountability systematic review in developing countries 2016 Seoul
• Using workflow reports in Archie to evaluate and improve Cochrane Review Group editorial processes 2014 Hyderabad
• Using workflows in Archie 2008 Freiburg
• Utilising Cochrane reviews in clinical guideline development 2005 Melbourne
• Utility of machine learning to identify research for updating a systematic map of evaluations of public health interventions within community pharmacies 2018 Edinburgh
• Utilization analysis of Chinese abstract of the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews in three university hospitals 2011 Madrid
• Utilization of artificial intelligence in emerging infectious diseases: a scoping review 2024 Prague [Global Evidence Summit]
• Utilization of global policy and evidence in a lower-middle-income country: Omnibus Health Guidelines development 2024 Prague [Global Evidence Summit]
• Utilization of LILACS in Cochrane Systematic Reviews Released in 2023 2024 Prague [Global Evidence Summit]
• Utilization of online database for medical information: a nationwide survey of physicians at regional hospitals in Taiwan 2008 Freiburg
• Utilization of trial registry records and randomized controlled trial study protocols in Cochrane systematic reviews of interventions: a content analysis 2016 Seoul
• Utilization, impact and barriers to use the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews: survey on Chilean post graduate medical students 2005 Melbourne
• Utilizing a logic model framework to evaluate patient navigation interventions on colorectal cancer screening time to diagnostic follow-up care: a study protocol 2013 Québec City
• Utilizing an Academic Practice Partnership to Support the Nursing Strategic Plan for Recruiting Nurse Graduates to Adult Medical-Surgical Units 2024 Prague [Global Evidence Summit]
• Utilizing evidence of Cochrane in decision making by policy makers: Gaps needs to be filled 2023 London
• Vaccine efficacy/effectiveness: Calculation, visualization, and interpretation based on an exemplary systematic review on COVID-19 vaccination in children 2023 London
• Validate the clinical practice guideline of acupuncture-related treatments for mitigating functional constipation 2024 Prague [Global Evidence Summit]
• Validating Cochrane Neonatal’s standard search databases: Is it okay to stop searching Embase? 2020 Abstracts
• Validating prognosis search filters using relative recall based on prognosis systematic reviews 2013 Québec City
• Validation and application of a systematic review and narrative synthesis within mental health services research 2011 Madrid
• Validation of a consumer-facing Australian Living Guideline for the Pharmacological Management of Inflammatory Arthritis 2024 Prague [Global Evidence Summit]
• Validation of a PubMed search filter for identifying studies including children 2010 Keystone
• Validation of a quality assessment checklist for case series studies 2013 Québec City
• Validation of a questionnaire to measure people’s ability to assess claims about treatment effects in Spanish 2017 Cape Town [Global Evidence Summit]
• Validation of five search filters for retrieving clinical guidelines showed low precision 2019 Santiago
• Validation of the EBP process assessment scale (EBPPAS): a scale to measure practitioners views about evidence-based practice 2010 Keystone
• Validation of the Spanish version of the Risk of Bias in Systematic Reviews (ROBIS) tool 2018 Edinburgh
• Validity of Health Technology Assessements(HTA) 2004 Ottawa
• Validity of patient-reported data collected through mobile application in a first paediatric at-home study 2017 Cape Town [Global Evidence Summit]
• Value of infographics in communicating Cochrane plain language summaries 2018 Edinburgh
• Values and preferences for colorectal cancer diagnosis outcomes: a systematic review 2024 Prague [Global Evidence Summit]
• Values and preferences in asthma patients for health care decision making: a systematic literature review. 2023 London
• Values and preferences in national and international COVID-19 public health guidelines: a systematic review 2024 Prague [Global Evidence Summit]
• Values-based health care: A content analysis study of Culture, Communication, Capacity and Collaboration in published implementation reports. 2024 Prague [Global Evidence Summit]
• Variability and completeness of outcome reporting in studies for low back pain rehabilitation interventions: a survey of trials included in Cochrane Reviews 2013 Québec City
• Variability of outcome measures among trials of topical Chinese herbal medicines for musculoskeletal injuries 2011 Madrid
• Variability of relative treatment effect among populations with low, moderate and high baseline risk: A meta-epidemiological study 2024 Prague [Global Evidence Summit]
• Variation among experienced reviewers in the interpretation of the evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) 2006 Dublin
• Variation in defining and reporting chronic postsurgical pain following breast cancer surgery: a systematic survey of 188 observational studies 2019 Santiago
• Variation in definition and measurement of primary outcomes in Cochrane systematic reviews of pharmacological treatment of stable COPD 2019 Santiago
• Variation in outcome measure usage across Cochrane Systematic Reviews related to three common eye conditions 2013 Québec City
• VARIATION OF WORK PARTICIPATION OUTCOMES AND MEASUREMENT METHODS IN TRIALS 2020 Abstracts
• Variations between trials of the effect of chemotherapy: an exploratory analysis of the meta-analysis of chemotherapy in head and neck carcinoma data 1997 Amsterdam
• Variations in approaches to mixed methods review: a case study 2020 Abstracts
• Verification of conflicts of interest disclosures in health research: a conceptual analysis 2018 Edinburgh
• Verification of the accuracy and completeness of disclosures of Conflict of Interest in the medical literature: a systematic survey 2017 Cape Town [Global Evidence Summit]
• Video Plain Language Summaries for public involvement in evidence synthesis: improving knowledge dissemination 2024 Prague [Global Evidence Summit]
• Videos to improve Portuguese translations of Cochrane abstracts and Plain language summaries: preliminary results of the Brazilian Quality Project 2019 Santiago
• Views towards publishing protocols for systematic reviews as peer-reviewed articles: an international survey of authors of non-Cochrane systematic reviews 2020 Abstracts
• Village doctors’ preparedness for future pandemics: evidence from a survey in Gansu province, China 2024 Prague [Global Evidence Summit]
• Vinca alkaloid containing regimen for advanced breast cancer 2004 Ottawa
• VIP (Very Integrated Program) Project on alcohol and drug abusers in Southern Sweden - RCT of efficacy of the adding the health promotion and rehabilitation for treatment of alcohol and drug abusers 2011 Madrid
• Virtual reality environments (VRE) for pre-and post- registration health professional education 2017 Cape Town [Global Evidence Summit]
• Virtual versus in-person format for guideline panel meetings: a qualitative study 2024 Prague [Global Evidence Summit]
• Virtual wards for people with frailty: a rapid realist review and its impact on UK policy and practice 2024 Prague [Global Evidence Summit]
• Vision 2020, The right to sight 2000 Cape Town
• Visitor-determined website improvement: combining survey and log results on Cochrane.org 2006 Dublin
• Visual summaries to increase accessibility and understanding of Cochrane Review evidence 2016 Seoul
• Visual-storytelling tools for evidence translation and use 2017 Cape Town [Global Evidence Summit]
• Visualisation study on research in the field of public health published in the Cochrane Library 2017 Cape Town [Global Evidence Summit]
• Visualising systematic review search strategies to assist information specialists 2019 Santiago
• Visualization analysis of the research front and hot domains of based-evidence research in the Global Evidence Summit 2018 Edinburgh
• Visualization of evidence based medicine development 2012 Auckland
• Vitamin A given to children with measles - Does dose make a difference? 2000 Cape Town
• Vitamin D analogues in the prevention of axial and appendicular fractures: report of a meta-analysis 1995 Oslo
• Voices of Cochrane authors: a review of Cochrane podcasts from 2014 to 2018 2019 Santiago
• Volatile anesthetics versus total intravenous anesthesia in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting: An updated meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis of randomized controlled trials 2020 Abstracts
• Volunteer initiative in war-torn Syria to translate Cochrane Blogshots 2018 Edinburgh
• Waiting list may be a ‘nocebo’ condition in psychotherapy trials 2013 Québec City
• Wales COVID-19 Evidence Centre: a bespoke evidence review process engaging stakeholders for supporting time-sensitive policy and clinical decision-making 2023 London
• Warnings for serious adverse events in drug labelling: Are same-class drugs treated the same? 2011 Madrid
• Waste in research? Exploring overlaps in systematic reviews on exercise for depression in children and adolescents 2018 Edinburgh
• Ways to ensure evidence-based clinical practice guidelines are of high quality 2005 Melbourne
• Web searching for systematic reviews: how to develop the current guidance on methods and reporting standards 2015 Vienna
• Web-based training packages to enhance evidence-informed policy-making for health in the Eastern Mediterranean Region 2023 London
• Web-based virtual collaborative workspace to support development of systematic reviews and clinical practice guidelines 2012 Auckland
• WeCancer: a self-tracking platform for both oncology patients and physicians to allow standardised treatment 2017 Cape Town [Global Evidence Summit]
• Weight of evidence and reliability of meta-analysis 1996 Adelaide
• Were meta-analyses of etiological studies of high methodological qualities? 2012 Auckland
• Were the outcomes reported in systematic reviews stated in protocols? A systematic review 2006 Dublin
• What action when there is no evidence? 2000 Cape Town
• What are the barriers preventing authors from reading written instructions? 2005 Melbourne
• What are the barriers to, and facilitators of, implementing and receiving MHPSS programmes delivered to populations affected by humanitarian emergencies? A qualitative evidence synthesis 2017 Cape Town [Global Evidence Summit]
• What are the characteristics of clinical practice guidelines for the treatment of depression? 2017 Cape Town [Global Evidence Summit]
• What are the characteristics of good reviews of adverse effects? A qualitative exploration 2006 Dublin
• What are the most efficient approaches to designing a systematic search strategy: a systematic review 2024 Prague [Global Evidence Summit]
• What are the opportunities for co-production in living evidence synthesis? 2018 Edinburgh
• What are the principles for the use of AI/ML in evidence syntheses? 2024 Prague [Global Evidence Summit]
• What are the reporting and methodological qualities of network meta-analysis? 2011 Madrid
• What Blocks the Production of Cochrane Reviews in China? 2002 Stavanger
• What can a trial registry do for you? The Pan African Clinical Trials Registry: a resource for Cochrane authors 2012 Auckland
• What can be learned on synthesizing evidence on deimplementation of low-value health care practices: an overview of reviews 2024 Prague [Global Evidence Summit]
• What can evidence-based education and healthcare learn from each other? 2017 Cape Town [Global Evidence Summit]
• What can The Cochrane Collaboration do to support people living in developing countries? A survey 2005 Melbourne
• What can we change through social media? Learning from sharing experience and evidence on sexual problems 2018 Edinburgh
• What can we learn from Chinese randomized controlled trials? A systematic review of Chinese venlafaxine studies 2011 Madrid
• What certainty can there be on how much treatments Work: empirical insight from recursive cumulative meta-analyses 2000 Cape Town
• What characteristics classify 'experience' with data abstraction? 2016 Seoul
• What could be expected from systematic reviews on individual patient data? Examples from hypertension treatment 1997 Amsterdam
• What criteria exist to justify evidence claims? A cross-disciplinary scoping map 2024 Prague [Global Evidence Summit]
• What determinants of public health research activity contextualise embedded researcher roles? A qualitative investigation in English local government 2023 London
• What difference does patient and public involvement make to evidence synthesis? 2020 Abstracts
• What dissemination bias really means and how we can tackle it 2015 Vienna
• What do authors of Cochrane reviews mean by the term 'older' people? 2006 Dublin
• What do clinicians understand and how do they interpret results from network meta-analysis and the way they are presented? 2016 Seoul
• What do Cochrane Systematic Reviews say about conservative and surgical treatment interventions in the treatment of rotator cuff disease? 2019 Santiago
• What do Cochrane Systematic Reviews say about telemedicine on healthcare? 2019 Santiago
• What do consumers think should be reported about consumer involvement in research? 2018 Edinburgh
• What do funders do to minimize waste in research? 2016 Seoul
• What do journals' author instructions state on search methods for systematic reviews: from evidence to implementation 2024 Prague [Global Evidence Summit]
• What do patients and physicians want at the point of care? Preliminary surveys in China 2005 Melbourne
• What do patients and their caregivers value on self-management interventions for chronic conditions? A scoping review of systematic reviews for the COMPAR-EU project 2019 Santiago
• What do test-treat trials measure? 2010 Keystone
• What do we know about interpretation and application of test accuracy measures? 2011 Madrid
• What do you mean there's no mean? 2006 Dublin
• What do you mean? Collated consumer feedback on Cochrane reviews and protocols on topics in pregnancy 2004 Ottawa
• What does good co-production in evidence synthesis look and feel like? 2023 London
• What does it mean? Plain language summaries of advice on health technologies 2018 Edinburgh
• What evidence based information do psychologists need? A Belgian perspective 2024 Prague [Global Evidence Summit]
• What evidence is available and what is required, in humanitarian assistance? 2015 Vienna
• What factors predict original research citation rates? Analysis of media reports, editorials, guidelines and reviews of Rituximab for non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL; 1997-2003) 2010 Keystone
• What German hospital pharmacists want to know: cross-sectional survey on information behaviour and information needs 2015 Vienna
• What guidance is available for researchers conducting overviews of reviews? a scoping review and qualitative metasummary 2015 Vienna
• What happens after the HTA analysis? A follow-up study of regional HTA reports conducted 2007-2015 2018 Edinburgh
• What Happens When the Evidence Is Not There?: The Contribution of Systematic Review Methodology to Future Research 1999 Rome
• What happens when you take the Cochrane methodology and apply it to non-clinical literature? 2005 Melbourne
• What if EPOC reviews only included studies from MEDLINE? 2018 Edinburgh
• What influences clinical decision-making in China? A scoping review 2024 Prague [Global Evidence Summit]
• What information resources are searched to prepare systematic reviews of economic evaluations? 2015 Vienna
• What is a good PICO-Question? Bringing together perspectives of guideline developers and authors of systematic reviews 2024 Prague [Global Evidence Summit]
• What is a meta-epidemiological study? Analysis of published literature showed heterogeneous study designs and definitions 2020 Abstracts
• What is a rapid review? 2011 Madrid
• What is being published? A word cloud of titles from The Cochrane Library 2012 Auckland
• What Is Going on in the Future For Evidence-Informed Health Policy-Making? 2020 Abstracts
• What is Needed to Make Guidelines Computable?: A consensus-development exercise 2024 Prague [Global Evidence Summit]
• What is the current situation of the published N-of-1 trial? 2013 Québec City
• What is the definition of "evidence" in Health Sciences? 2023 London
• What is the effect of phasing out long-chain per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances on the concentrations of perfluoroalkyl acids and their precursors in the environment? 2017 Cape Town [Global Evidence Summit]
• What is the evidence for collaborative approaches between service users and community mental health nurses to identify and support survivors of Domestic Violence and Abuse (DVA) using a rapid review approach? 2017 Cape Town [Global Evidence Summit]
• What is the experience of family carers of patient with dementia living in community of South Korea? 2020 Abstracts
• What is the influence of randomization sequence generation and allocation concealment on treatment effects of physical therapy trials? A meta-epidemiological study 2015 Vienna
• What is the level of expertise of ChatGPT in the domain of systematic reviews and meta-analysis? 2023 London
• What is the methodological quality and transparency of depression clinical practice guidelines? 2017 Cape Town [Global Evidence Summit]
• What is the most appropriate knowledge synthesismethod to conduct a review? A scoping review 2013 Québec City
• What is the most efficient de-duplication software for use in systematic reviews? 2020 Abstracts
• What is the nature and magnitude of inappropriate healthcare services in Canada? A Systematic Review 2020 Abstracts
• What is the probability of discovering breakthrough interventions in industry versus publicly sponsored randomized controlled trials 2013 Québec City
• What is the probability that higher vs lower quality of evidence represents true effects estimates? 2024 Prague [Global Evidence Summit]
• What is the probability that results of meta-analyses will favor innovative treatments? 2000 Cape Town
• What is the role of public trials registers in Cochrane Systematic Reviews? 2011 Madrid
• What is the role of scientific evidence in decisions to adopt complex innovations? A multiple case study in cancer care 2017 Cape Town [Global Evidence Summit]
• What is the study design? 2004 Ottawa
• What is the test’s accuracy in my practice population Tailored meta-analysis provides a plausible estimate 2015 Vienna
• What is valuable research? 2024 Prague [Global Evidence Summit]
• What kind of evidence can be found in incident reporting systems? Systematic evaluation of incident reports to identify risks using syringe pumps 2011 Madrid
• What kinds of evidence does civil-society bring to decision-making and how are these used? A case-study of vaccine-decisions in Ghana. 2024 Prague [Global Evidence Summit]
• What measures of accuracy should we present in DTA reviews? 2011 Madrid
• What modifications are made in studies reviewed by the United States Food and Drug Administration for medical device approval? 2009 Singapore
• What next for Cochrane in systematic reviews of prognosis? 2015 Vienna
• What obstacles do general practitioners face in implementing guidelines for the management of depression? 1997 Amsterdam
• What place do consumers and an international network structure have within The Cochrane Collaboration? A formal review 2009 Singapore
• What published methodological guides exist on how to conduct the most common types of evidence syntheses? – A scoping review 2024 Prague [Global Evidence Summit]
• What systematic reviews gain when they include qualitative research: a systematic review of qualitative work on workplace-based return to work practices 2004 Ottawa
• What to do if the results of conventional pairwise meta-analysis and network meta-analysis are contradictory? An example from a systematic review on the effects of antipsychotics in treatment-resistant schizophrenia 2014 Hyderabad
• What to do with non 2x2 data from a diagnostic systematic review? An example from a review on identifying the seizure focus in patients with epilepsy 2004 Ottawa
• What to edit and when in Cochrane reviews. Where to start and when to stop! 2017 Cape Town [Global Evidence Summit]
• What useful information does a search summary table provide: a case study from a mixed methods systematic review 2019 Santiago
• What we do in the shadows: Interviews with methodologists on synthesis methods when meta-analysis is not possible for all studies 2023 London
• What we don't know about evidence and medical practice: Issues raised by Project ImpACT and lessons from the impact literature 2004 Ottawa
• What we know we don’t know: identifying thera­peutic uncertainties from systematic reviews 2009 Singapore
• What we’re learning about evidence-informed policymaking: Researchers’ perspectives on advocating for evidence in Africa 2017 Cape Town [Global Evidence Summit]
• What will the first impact factor of The Cochrane Library tell us 2008 Freiburg
• What will the second impact factor tell us about The Cochrane Library and its systematic reviews? 2009 Singapore
• What Works Centres – collaboration across health, social care, educational achievement, crime, early intervention, economic growth, ageing better and wellbeing 2017 Cape Town [Global Evidence Summit]
• What Works Climate? Systematic learning on climate solutions for improved IPCC assessments and evidence-based policy 2024 Prague [Global Evidence Summit]
• What works in preventing radicalization, hate crime, and violent extremism: The Campbell Collaboration countering violent extremism (CVE) evidence synthesis programme 2024 Prague [Global Evidence Summit]
• What works in supporting inclusive development research? 2024 Prague [Global Evidence Summit]
• What works to increase the use of evidence for policy decision-making: discussing insights from an evidence map and systematic review 2024 Prague [Global Evidence Summit]
• What works, for whom and when: the rational for and outcomes from a realist review of advocacy for women experiencing partner abuse 2018 Edinburgh
• What's unique about conducting research with adolescents in low- and middle-income countries: Introducing a new methodological series 2017 Cape Town [Global Evidence Summit]
• What’s in ‘Dr Cochrane’ for family physicians? Evaluation of an online Cochrane Learning programme with the Information Assessment Method (IAM) 2013 Québec City
• What’s in it and how do users find it?—challenges of knowledge transfer through specialised registers of health promotion effectiveness 2013 Québec City
• What’s more important - timeliness or accuracy of results in providing evidence? Preliminary results on a research program on rapid reviews 2013 Québec City
• What’s the point of evaluating effectiveness? Perspectives from a low income setting 2010 Keystone
• What’s the problem in involving consumers in Cochrane review groups: the experiences of the consumer representative on the Monitoring and Registration Group 2008 Freiburg
• What’s the story?: publicity, global media coverage and author experience 2011 Madrid
• What(ch) evidence! Drawing on the actor-network theory for an exploration of the dynamic struggle of the Cochrane Collaboration to build bridges between research results and clinical practice 2004 Ottawa
• When an overview of systematic reviews is not enough—challenges in synthesizing evidence from both reviews and primary studies 2024 Prague [Global Evidence Summit]
• When and how to update systematic reviews: a methodological systematic review 2006 Dublin
• When can research conducted elsewhere be useful here? Perceptions of local applicability and transferability 2010 Keystone
• When can we trust ‘early’ statistically significant treatment effect estimates in cumulative cardiology meta-analyses? – a simulation study 2010 Keystone
• When clinical practice does not follow the evidence: physician's recommendation of mammography 1997 Amsterdam
• When clinical practice does not follow the evidence: physician's recommendation of mammography 1997 Amsterdam
• When do indirect and mixed treatment comparisons result in invalid findings? A graphical explanation 2011 Madrid
• When engaging with stakeholders is tricky: effective and ethical stakeholder engagement in reviews on sensitive, challenging or controversial topics 2018 Edinburgh
• When it rains: synthesizing umbrella reviews of educational interventions 2010 Keystone
• When lack of evidence informs policy and the public debate: experiences from a systematic review on shared physical custody 2018 Edinburgh
• When methodologies conflict: developing tools to compare and select appropriate methodologies for conducting, and appraising evidence from systematic reviews 2018 Edinburgh
• When rating gets tough - coping with difficult situations when using the new risk of bias assessment tool 2008 Freiburg
• When should an effective treatment be recommended for use? Quantitative derivation of the threshold NNT 1994 Hamilton
• When should potentially false research findings be tolerated? 2006 Dublin
• When should systematic reviews be replicated, and when is it wasteful? 2019 Santiago
• When should systematic reviews be replicated, and when is it wasteful? An analysis of reasons for discordance among overlapping systematic reviews 2017 Cape Town [Global Evidence Summit]
• When should systematic reviews of effects restrict studies to those conducted in low- and middle-income countries: A proposal? 2011 Madrid
• When the evidence is lacking, ways to proceed when the main result of systematic reviews are- more research needed. 2024 Prague [Global Evidence Summit]
• When there is no evidence - an RCT for treatment of otitis media with asymptomatic effusion (OME) in Aboriginal infants 1996 Adelaide
• When to call upon a working group of experts to produce recommendations using an Accelerated Developed Guidelines (ADG) method? 2017 Cape Town [Global Evidence Summit]
• When treatments can be combined: example of infection prophylaxis in cancer patients 2009 Singapore
• When you conduct a systematic review about drug safety, you will run into these issues 2015 Vienna
• When, why and how to conduct a Cochrane overview of reviews 2018 Edinburgh
• When, why, and how to conduct a Cochrane overview of reviews 2016 Seoul
• Where and how to find data on safety: What do systematic reviews of complementary therapies tell us? 2011 Madrid
• Where do completed trials come from? 2006 Dublin
• Where do systematic reviews in health policy and systems research search for studies? 2009 Singapore
• Where do we stand with involving knowledge users in rapid reviews? – a cross-sectional study 2024 Prague [Global Evidence Summit]
• Where does economics fit in? A review of economics in Cochrane Reviews 2007 Sao Paulo
• Where to identify information on adverse effects for a systematic review: a methodological overview 2008 Freiburg
• Where to look for studies to include in EPOC reviews 2013 Québec City
• Whether prospective registration can improve the overall reporting and methodological quality of systematic reviews: a comparative meta-epidemiological study 2016 Seoul
• Which coding system for therapeutic information 1998 Baltimore
• Which Electronic Resources Should be Searched to Identify RCTs for Systematic Reviews: A Systematic Overview of the Literature 2002 Stavanger
• Which information sources should be used to identify studies for systematic reviews of economic evaluations? 2018 Edinburgh
• Which is more generalizable, powerful and interpretable in meta-analyses, mean difference (MD) or standardized mean difference (SMD)? 2013 Québec City
• Which journals have cited Cochrane Systematic Reviews? 2013 Québec City
• Which knowledge synthesis method can be used to answer research questions of complex evidence? 2015 Vienna
• Which literature retrieval method is most effective? Teaching the Index Medicus/Medline in post-graduate courses for family physicians 1997 Amsterdam
• Which meta-analysis model best fits my diagnostic test data? Use of model fit statistics 2008 Freiburg
• Which Review Group does this title belong to? 2004 Ottawa
• Which summary measure of treatment effectiveness in meta-analysis is the most externally applicable, odds ratio, risk ratio or risk difference? 2000 Cape Town
• WHO Abortion Care Guideline: systematic integration of a competency framework for the health worker recommendations 2024 Prague [Global Evidence Summit]
• Who do Cochrane Reviewers Believe They are Writing for? 2002 Stavanger
• WHO environmental and occupational health guidelines: 8 challenges 2017 Cape Town [Global Evidence Summit]
• WHO Essential Medicines List and WHO Guidelines: Recommendation Mapping and Discordance Analysis 2024 Prague [Global Evidence Summit]
• WHO Essential Medicines List as a priority setting method based on country needs to orient (rapid) Cochrane evidence syntheses 2019 Santiago
• Who is listening? A qualitative study of Cochrane podcast users 2011 Madrid
• Who is responsible for considering how contextual factors affect healthcare interventions: reviewers, end users of reviews or both? 2009 Singapore
• Who is responsible for developing patient guidelines? 2017 Cape Town [Global Evidence Summit]
• Who is using The Cochrane Library? Usage statistics of Wiley InterScience 2009 Singapore
• WHO recommendations on admission, referral, transfer, and exit criteria for severe wasting and nutritional edema informed by prognostic evidence synthesis 2024 Prague [Global Evidence Summit]
• Who should benefit from screening? Are we using the right denominator? 2015 Vienna
• Who uses The Cochrane Library? Data from two online surveys of users of The Cochrane Library on the Wiley InterScience platform 2006 Dublin
• Who wants to be a meta-analyst: The Second Annual Game Show Edition 2008 Freiburg
• Who wants to be a meta-analyst? 2014 Hyderabad
• WHO-INTEGRATE evidence-to-decision framework: applying a complexity perspective in guideline development 2024 Prague [Global Evidence Summit]
• WHO-ISH (World Health Organisation and International Society of Hypertension) Blood Pressure Lowering Treatment Trialists' Collaboration: a register of trials for the conduct of overviews 1996 Adelaide
• Who, why, what, where & when – questions about usage of The Cochrane Library 2010 Keystone
• Who’s afraid of…. AI? How to harness the benefits of Large Language Models for evidence synthesis and mitigate the risks 2024 Prague [Global Evidence Summit]
• Whose knowledge counts: Using the PowerCube to explore visible, hidden and invisible power affecting the production and use of evidence 2024 Prague [Global Evidence Summit]
• Why 196 Cochrane Systematic Reviews were withdrawn in Cochrane Database of systematic review? 2013 Québec City
• Why a Cochrane Diet and Nutrition Sub-Field? 2005 Melbourne
• Why an overhaul of randomized controlled trials concerning women’s health is in demand. A checklist to assess the integrity of research 2019 Santiago
• Why and when children are different: Guidance on appropriate inclusion of child health data in systematic reviews 2011 Madrid
• Why are most Cochrane perinatal reviews inconclusive and what needs to be done? 2007 Sao Paulo
• Why conducting one if you can conduct 82 (living) reviews? 2018 Edinburgh
• Why did the patient have the test? Considering the clinical pathway and intended role of a test on diagnostic accuracy 2018 Edinburgh
• Why disguise adverse events? 2017 Cape Town [Global Evidence Summit]
• Why do Cochrane Reviews have fewer citations than systematic reviews from journals with high impact factors? 2018 Edinburgh
• Why do diagnostic tests differ in performance between different settings? 2013 Québec City
• Why do healthcare professionals use eTG complete instead of clinical practice guidelines when making prescribing decisions? 2017 Cape Town [Global Evidence Summit]
• Why do Systematic Reviewers Choose Paper over Electronic (Cochrane) Publication? 2002 Stavanger
• Why don’t GPs follow guidelines? Increasing our understanding of complex interventions by combining qualitative and quantitative reviews 2008 Freiburg
• Why should we translate Cochrane Reviews into French? 2013 Québec City
• Why so many 'RCTs' were false? A further investiga­tion about ethics review status of the 'RCTs' published in Chinese journals 2009 Singapore
• Why systematic review production and update processes are resource intensive: a phenomenological qualitative study protocol 2020 Abstracts
• Why we need a new Cochrane Thematic Group on Person-centred care, Health Systems and Public Health 2023 London
• Why were they missed? Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) identified through the MEDLINE Retagging Project but not the US National Library of Medicine (NLM) 2008 Freiburg
• Wikipedia and crowd sourcing: Improving health information for the public 2017 Cape Town [Global Evidence Summit]
• Wikipedia meets Cochrane: working to get better evidence into mass use 2013 Québec City
• Wikipedia: An important dissemination tool for Cochrane 2017 Cape Town [Global Evidence Summit]
• WikiRecs and BMJ RapidRecs: rapid and trustworthy recommendations that provide ingredients and tools for shared decision making 2017 Cape Town [Global Evidence Summit]
• WikiRecs: rapid creation and dissemination of evidence summaries and trustworthy recommendations to point of care 2016 Seoul
• Wikis and collaborative writing applications in healthcare: results of a scoping review 2013 Québec City
• Will notification that the journal does not require authors to pay to publish encourage them to submit to a subscription-based journal? A randomized study 2016 Seoul
• Will the Epistemonikos Trials Database avoid the need of searching in multiple databases? 2024 Prague [Global Evidence Summit]
• Will web search engines replace bibliographic databases? Review 2015 Vienna
• Will you fund my idea? A retrospective look at public nominations to the AHRQ EPC Program. 2020 Abstracts
• Willingness of Korean medicine doctors to participate and their potential influence in alleviating the high suicide rate in South Korea 2024 Prague [Global Evidence Summit]
• Willingness to share individual participant data, and barriers and facilitators to data sharing: a retrospective cohort study and cross-sectional survey 2020 Abstracts
• Withdrawals of Cochrane systematic reviews: a description of reasons 2018 Edinburgh
• Women's experiences of termination of pregnancy for foetal anomaly: A qualitative systematic review 2017 Cape Town [Global Evidence Summit]
• Women’s preferences for surgical treatments of urinary incontinence: a discrete choice experiment 2018 Edinburgh
• Word frequency analysis of over a million words to support the development of search strategies on 'health-related values' 2011 Madrid
• Wording GRADEd evidence statements and recommendations 2011 Madrid
• Work conditioning, work hardening and functional restoration for workers with back and neck pain (Cochrane Review) 2004 Ottawa
• Workforce training in evidence-informed decision making 2013 Québec City
• Working in partnership with people in the developing world 2005 Melbourne
• Working in partnership with stakeholders to update a priority Cochrane Review: implementation and evaluation 2017 Cape Town [Global Evidence Summit]
• Working in partnership with the WHO to provide timely evidence on causes of maternal death 2019 Santiago
• Working together to prioritise and synthesise evidence about promising alternative models of healthcare delivery for a more sustainable health system 2023 London
• Working with diverse evidence in Cochrane Reviews: methods and tools to support integration of qualitative and quantitative evidence 2019 Santiago
• Working with knowledge users to improve evidence-based medicine prescribing and use: key informant interviews and the process of developing an international training collaboration 2013 Québec City
• Working with policy makers to maximise the utility of EGMs: experiences of Exeter Policy and Research Programme Evidence Review Facility 2023 London
• Working with stakeholders to identify evidence gaps: an example from autism 2018 Edinburgh
• Working with the GRADEprofiler (GRADEpro) 2008 Freiburg
• Workings of the Australian Satellite of the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Group 2006 Dublin
• Workplace interventions for reducing sitting at work 2016 Seoul
• Works works with communities (for whom and in what context): the Innovation Zones at Queen's University Belfast 2024 Prague [Global Evidence Summit]
• Workshop for Cochrane Trials Search Co-ordinators (advanced) 2005 Melbourne
• Workshop for Cochrane Trials Search Co-ordinators (intermediate) 2005 Melbourne
• Workshop for journalists as a communication tool to disseminate Evidence-Based Health to the general public 2014 Hyderabad
• Workshop for Managing Editors and Assistant Managing Editors 2015 Vienna
• Workshop for Managing Editors and Assistant Managing Editors 2014 Hyderabad
• Workshop for Managing Editors and Assistant Managing Editors 2012 Auckland
• Workshop for Managing Editors and Assistant Managing Editors 2016 Seoul
• Workshop for Managing Editors and Assistant Managing Editors (restricted) 2013 Québec City
• Workshops on evidence-based medicine for health professionals who support judicial decisions related to healthcare in Brazil 2024 Prague [Global Evidence Summit]
• World Health Organization mental health gap action programme (mhGAP) intervention guide: A review of evidence from low- and middle-income countries 2017 Cape Town [Global Evidence Summit]
• Would a timely analysis of secondary outcomes have led to an earlier identification of effective stroke rehabilitation interventions? 2013 Québec City
• Would evidence make a difference in people’s willingness to pay for and actual use of anti-hypertensive medication? 2016 Seoul
• Writing a Cochrane Review update: getting started and challenges to overcome 2020 Abstracts
• Writing abstracts for Cochrane systematic reviews using newly-published guidance 2012 Auckland
• Writing and commenting on Plain Language Summaries (PLSs) to improve quality 2015 Vienna
• Writing Complex Search Strategies ***PARTICIPANTS: Please bring your laptops to this session 2013 Québec City
• Writing evidence summaries for the general public: lessons learned from collaboration with Patient Partners 2020 Abstracts
• You can learn a lot from a DUMMY: Improving search strategies using the ‘diagnostic-based utility for mining MEDLINE’ (DUMMY) 2012 Auckland
• You can't save lives unless there are people dying: implications of heterogeneity of control rates in clinical trials and meta-analyses 1994 Hamilton
• Young neurologists interested in Cochrane reviews need more basic knowledge in statistics and epidemiology 2006 Dublin
• Your gateway to Chinese research 2012 Auckland
• Youth evidence-based medicine camp: improving logic thinking for high school students 2019 Santiago
• Zinc Supplementation for Acute and Persistent Watery Diarrhea in Children: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis 2024 Prague [Global Evidence Summit]