Suppr超能文献

姑息治疗证据审查服务(PaCERS):一个知识转移伙伴关系。

Palliative Care Evidence Review Service (PaCERS): a knowledge transfer partnership.

机构信息

Specialist Unit for Review Evidence, Cardiff University, Heath Park, Cardiff, CF14 4YS, United Kingdom.

Wales Cancer Research Centre, Marie Curie Palliative Care Research Centre, Division of Population Medicine, School of Medicine, Cardiff University, Heath Park, Cardiff, United Kingdom.

出版信息

Health Res Policy Syst. 2019 Dec 16;17(1):100. doi: 10.1186/s12961-019-0504-4.

Abstract

The importance of linking evidence into practice and policy is recognised as a key pillar of a prudent approach to healthcare; it is of importance to healthcare professionals and decision-makers across the world in every speciality. However, rapid access to evidence to support service redesign, or to change practice at pace, is challenging. This is particularly so in smaller specialties such as Palliative Care, where pressured multidisciplinary clinicians lack time and skill sets to locate and appraise the literature relevant to a particular area. Therefore, we have initiated the Palliative Care Evidence Review Service (PaCERS), a knowledge transfer partnership through which we have developed a clear methodology to conduct evidence reviews to support professionals and other decision-makers working in palliative care.PaCERS methodology utilises modified systematic review methods as there is no agreed definition or an accepted methodology for conducting rapid reviews. This paper describes the stages involved based on our iterative recent experiences and engagement with stakeholders, who are the potential beneficiaries of the research. Uniquely, we emphasise the process and opportunities of engagement with the clinical workforce and policy-makers throughout the review, from developing and refining the review question at the start through to the importance of demonstrating impact. We are faced with the challenge of the trade-off between the timely transfer of evidence against the risk of impacting on rigour. To address this issue, we try to ensure transparency throughout the review process. Our methodology aligns with key principles of knowledge synthesis in defining a process that is transparent, robust and improving the efficiency and timeliness of the review.Our reviews are clinically or policy driven and, although we use modified systematic review methods, one of the key differences between published review processes and our review process is in our relationship with the requester. This streamlining approach to synthesising evidence in a timely manner helps to inform decisions faced by clinicians and decision-makers in healthcare settings, supporting, at pace, knowledge transfer and mobilisation.

摘要

将证据与实践和政策联系起来的重要性被认为是谨慎对待医疗保健的关键支柱;它对全球每个专业的医疗保健专业人员和决策者都很重要。然而,快速获取证据以支持服务重新设计或快速改变实践是具有挑战性的。在较小的专业领域(如姑息治疗)尤其如此,那里压力大的多学科临床医生缺乏时间和技能来定位和评估与特定领域相关的文献。因此,我们启动了姑息治疗证据审查服务(PaCERS),这是一个知识转移伙伴关系,通过该关系,我们开发了一种明确的方法来进行证据审查,以支持姑息治疗领域的专业人员和其他决策者。PaCERS 方法利用了经过修改的系统评价方法,因为目前还没有关于进行快速评价的共识定义或可接受的方法。本文描述了基于我们最近迭代经验和与利益相关者(即研究的潜在受益者)的互动的各个阶段。独特的是,我们强调了在整个审查过程中与临床工作人员和决策者进行接触的过程和机会,从开始时制定和完善审查问题到展示影响的重要性。我们面临着在及时转移证据与影响严谨性的风险之间进行权衡的挑战。为了解决这个问题,我们试图在整个审查过程中保持透明。我们的方法符合知识综合的关键原则,定义了一个透明、稳健的过程,并提高了审查的效率和及时性。我们的审查是临床或政策驱动的,尽管我们使用经过修改的系统评价方法,但发表的评价过程与我们的评价过程之间的一个关键区别在于我们与请求者的关系。这种及时综合证据的简化方法有助于为临床医生和决策者在医疗保健环境中面临的决策提供信息,支持快速进行知识转移和动员。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验