Cochrane evidence - health and medical education


Cite item

Full Text

Open Access Open Access
Restricted Access Access granted
Restricted Access Subscription or Fee Access

Abstract

In an editorial on the current topic - treatment and prevention of new coronavirus infection, the rationale for using evidence from Cochrane Systematic Reviews to make evidence-informed decisions in practical medicine is justified. The editorial refers to the results of a recent Cochrane Review on chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine in COVID-19, which concludes that hydroxychloroquine does not reduce mortality from COVID-19 and does not reduce the need for mechanical ventilation, with more adverse effects than placebo.

Full Text

Restricted Access

About the authors

Lilia E. Ziganshina

Russian Medical Academy of Continuing Professional Education of the Ministry of Healthcare of Russia; Cochrane Russia

Email: rmapo@rmapo.ru; lezign@gmail.com
MD, professor, leading coordinator of the Center for evidence-based medical knowledge broadcasting of the institute of professional development methodology, professor of the Department of epidemiology; Director 125993, Moscow, 2/1 build. 1 Barrikadnaya Str

Elena Yu. Malinnikova

Russian Medical Academy of Continuing Professional Education of the Ministry of Healthcare of Russia

Email: malinacgb@mail.ru
MD, professor, head of the Department of virology 125993, Moscow, 2/1 build. 1 Barrikadnaya Str

Anatoly A. Stremoukhov

Russian Medical Academy of Continuing Professional Education of the Ministry of Healthcare of Russia

Email: rmapo@rmapo.ru; astremo@bk.ru
MD, professor, Director the Institute of professional development methodology, head of the Department of general medical practice and outpatient therapy 125993, Moscow, 2/1 build. 1 Barrikadnaya Str

References

  1. Chalmers I., Glasziou P. Avoidable waste in the production and reporting of research evidence. Lancet. 2009; 374(9683): 86-89. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(09)60329-9.
  2. Macleod M.R., Michie S., Roberts I. et al. Biomedical research: increasing value, reducing waste. Lancet. 2014; 383(9912): 101-04. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(13)62329-6.
  3. Glasziou P., Altman D.G., Bossuyt P. et al. Reducing waste from incomplete or unusable reports of biomedical research. Lancet. 2014; 383(9913): 267-76. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(13)62228-X.
  4. Lund H., Brunnhuber K., Juhl C. et al. Towards evidence based research. BMJ. 2016; 355: i5440. doi: 10.1136/bmj.i5440.
  5. Lund H., Juhl C. Doing meaningful systematic reviews is no gravy train. Lancet. 2020; 395(10241): 1905. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30172-0.
  6. Lund H., Juhl C.B., Norgaard B. et al. Evidence-based research series-paper 2: Using an evidence-based research approach before a new study is conducted to ensure value. J Clin Epidemiol. 2021; 129: 158-66. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.07.019.
  7. Lund H., Juhl C.B., Norgaard B. et al. Evidence-Based Research Series-Paper 3: Using an evidence-based research approach to place your results into context after the study is performed to ensure usefulness of the conclusion. J Clin Epidemiol. 2021; 129: 167-71. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.07.021.
  8. Useem J., Brennan A., LaValley M. et al. Systematic differences between Cochrane and Non-Cochrane meta-analyses on the same topic: A matched pair analysis. PLoS One. 2015; 10(12): e0144980. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0144980.
  9. Koletsi D., Fleming P.S., Michelaki I., Pandis N. Heterogeneity in Cochrane and non-Cochrane meta-analyses in orthodontics. J Dent. 2018; 74: 90-94. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2018.05.003.

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML
Download

Copyright (c) 2021 Bionika Media

This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies