大象APP

U.S. flag

SHARE:

FacebookXEmail AHRQPrint

Search All Research Studies

 

大象APPResearch Studies Date

Topics

大象APPResearch Studies

Sign up:

Research Studies is a compilation of published research articles funded by 大象APPor authored by 大象APPresearchers.

Results

1 to 5 of 5 Research Studies Displayed
Ottosen MJ, Engebretson JC, Etchegaray JM
Steps in developing a patient-centered measure of hospital design factors.
This research methodology column focuses on describing a four-step medical ethnography approach that can be used in developing patient-centered measures of interest to those studying built environments. The authors use this approach to illustrate how one might develop a measure that can be used to understand parent perceptions of the safety culture in neonatal intensive care units.
AHRQ-funded; HS022944.
Citation: Ottosen MJ, Engebretson JC, Etchegaray JM . Steps in developing a patient-centered measure of hospital design factors. HERD 2017 Jul;10(4):10-16. doi: 10.1177/1937586716685290.
.
Keywords: Patient Safety, Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU), Quality Measures, Research Methodologies
Burda BU, Holmer HK, Norris SL
Limitations of A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) and suggestions for improvement.
A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) is a commonly used tool to assess the quality of systematic reviews; however, modifications are needed to improve its usability, reliability, and validity. In this commentary, the authors summarize their experience and the experiences of others who have used AMSTAR and provide suggestions for its improvement.
AHRQ-funded; HS018500.
Citation: Burda BU, Holmer HK, Norris SL . Limitations of A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) and suggestions for improvement. Syst Rev 2016 Apr 12;5:58. doi: 10.1186/s13643-016-0237-1.
.
Keywords: Research Methodologies, Data, Evidence-Based Practice, Guidelines, Quality Measures
Dy SM, Herr K, Bernacki RE
Methodological research priorities in palliative care and hospice quality measurement.
The authors describe three key priorities: 1) defining the population of interest for palliative care quality indicators, 2) developing methods to measure quality from different data sources, and 3) conducting research to advance the development of patient/family-reported indicators. They apply these concepts to the key quality domain of advance care planning and address relevance to implementation of indicators in improving care in order to facilitate improved quality measurement across all populations with serious illness and care for patients and families.
AHRQ-funded; HS023681.
Citation: Dy SM, Herr K, Bernacki RE . Methodological research priorities in palliative care and hospice quality measurement. J Pain Symptom Manage 2016 Feb;51(2):155-62. doi: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2015.10.019.
.
Keywords: Research Methodologies, Palliative Care, Quality Measures, Quality Indicators (QIs), Quality of Care
Gartlehner G, Dobrescu A, Evans TS
The predictive validity of quality of evidence grades for the stability of effect estimates was low: a meta-epidemiological study.
This study sought to determine the predictive validity of the U.S. Evidence-based Practice Center (EPC) approach to GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation). It concluded that the limited predictive validity of the EPC approach to GRADE seems to reflect a mismatch between expected and observed changes in treatment effects as bodies of evidence advance from insufficient to high quality of evidence.
AHRQ-funded; 290201200008I.
Citation: Gartlehner G, Dobrescu A, Evans TS . The predictive validity of quality of evidence grades for the stability of effect estimates was low: a meta-epidemiological study. J Clin Epidemiol 2016 Feb;70:52-60. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2015.08.018.
.
Keywords: Evidence-Based Practice, Research Methodologies, Quality Measures
Berkman ND, Lohr KN, Ansari MT, et al.
大象APPAuthor: Chang S
Grading the strength of a body of evidence when assessing health care interventions: an EPC update.
The purpose of this article is to revise the 2010 guidance on grading the strength of evidence (SOE) of the effectiveness of drugs, devices, and other preventive and therapeutic interventions produced by AHRQ鈥檚 Evidence-based Practice Center program. It concluded that no single approach for grading SOE suits all reviews, but a more consistent and transparent approach to reporting summary information will make reviews more useful.
大象APPauthored; AHRQ-funded 290200710056I
Citation: Berkman ND, Lohr KN, Ansari MT, et al.. Grading the strength of a body of evidence when assessing health care interventions: an EPC update. J Clin Epidemiol. 2015 Nov;68(11):1312-24. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.11.023..
Keywords: Comparative Effectiveness, Evidence-Based Practice, Research Methodologies, Quality Measures

Related Content

Research Findings & Reports