Suppr超能文献

在缺乏证据的情况下:利用专家共识方法填补低收入国家和少数族裔的证据空白。

Where there is no evidence: use of expert consensus methods to fill the evidence gap in low-income countries and cultural minorities.

机构信息

Centre for International Mental Health, Melbourne School of Population Health, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria 3010, Australia.

出版信息

Int J Ment Health Syst. 2010 Dec 21;4:33. doi: 10.1186/1752-4458-4-33.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

In both developing countries and in relation to cultural minorities there have been calls to scale up mental health services and for evidence-informed policy and practice.

EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE

The evidence based medicine movement has had a major influence in improving practice. However, implementation of this approach has some major difficulties. One that has been neglected is the situation where there is no relevant evidence. This situation is more likely to occur for healthcare decisions in developing countries or for cultural minorities within developed countries, because resources do not exist for expensive research studies.

CONSENSUS METHODS

Consensus methods, such as the Delphi process, can be useful in providing an evidence base in situations where there is insufficient evidence. They provide a way of systematically tapping the expertise of people working in the area and give evidence that is readily applicable for a particular country and culture. Although consensus methods are often thought of as low in the hierarchy of evidence, consensus is central to the scientific process. We present four examples where the Delphi method was used to assess expert consensus in situations where no other evidence existed: estimating the prevalence of dementia in developing countries, developing mental health first aid guidelines in Asian countries, mental health first aid guidelines for Australian Aboriginal people, and modification of the concept of 'recovery' for Australian immigrant communities.

CONCLUSION

Consensus methods can provide a basis for decision-making and considered action when there is no evidence or when there are doubts about the applicability of evidence that has been generated from other populations or health system settings.

摘要

背景

在发展中国家和文化少数群体中,人们呼吁扩大精神卫生服务,并制定基于证据的政策和实践。

循证医学

循证医学运动对改善实践产生了重大影响。然而,这种方法的实施存在一些重大困难。一个被忽视的问题是没有相关证据的情况。这种情况在发展中国家的医疗保健决策或发达国家的文化少数群体中更有可能发生,因为没有资源进行昂贵的研究。

共识方法

共识方法,如 Delphi 过程,在证据不足的情况下可以为提供证据基础提供有用的方法。它们为系统地挖掘该领域专业人员的专业知识提供了一种途径,并为特定国家和文化提供了易于应用的证据。尽管共识方法通常被认为是证据层次结构中的低层次,但共识是科学过程的核心。我们提出了四个例子,在这些例子中,德尔菲方法用于评估没有其他证据存在的情况下的专家共识:估计发展中国家痴呆症的患病率、制定亚洲国家的心理健康急救指南、为澳大利亚原住民制定心理健康急救指南,以及修改澳大利亚移民社区“康复”的概念。

结论

当没有证据或对从其他人群或卫生系统环境中产生的证据的适用性存在疑问时,共识方法可以为决策提供依据,并为采取行动提供依据。

相似文献

6
The future of Cochrane Neonatal.考克兰新生儿协作网的未来。
Early Hum Dev. 2020 Nov;150:105191. doi: 10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2020.105191. Epub 2020 Sep 12.

引用本文的文献

5
Latin American consensus on the treatment of melasma.拉丁美洲黄褐斑治疗共识。
Int J Dermatol. 2025 Mar;64(3):499-512. doi: 10.1111/ijd.17522. Epub 2024 Oct 16.

本文引用的文献

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验