The world's leading software for managing and streamlining your systematic review. Discover how to do a systematic review in less time, while maintaining quality and accuracy.
evidence.guide
Evidence intelligence platform: dashboards, docs, and tooling for trustworthy research quality.
AI-Powered Systematic Review & Literature Review Platform
Rayyan is the pioneering AI-powered platform redefining evidence-based research & decision-making. Designed for efficient systematic literature review ...
ACE: Audit Clinical Evidence
Independent audits of published clinical research for statistical errors, data inconsistencies, and research integrity violations.
Covid-19 living Data
COVID-NMA is an international research initiative supported by the WHO and Cochrane.
Meta to roll back Covid-19 misinformation measures
Meta is revising its policies to take a regional approach towards countries that still have public health emergency declarations.
Introducing COSIG: The Collection of Open Science Integrity Guides
Investigating the integrity of published scientific papers is key to the scientific process, but the necessary knowledge is in short supply. We present COSIG, an open collection of meta-scientific guides enabling anyone to perform forensic peer review.
Archive: New COVID-19 ‘Citizen Science’ Initiative Lets Any Adult with a Smartphone Help to Fight Coronavirus
The online study would try to help researchers gain insight into how the virus is spreading and identify ways to predict and reduce the number of new infections.
Long Covid Studies - Possible long COVID treatments
See all researched treatments for long COVID, along with evidence summaries.
Patient Led Research Collaborative for Long COVID
About the Patient-Generated Hypotheses JournalPatient-Led Research Collaborative
Patient Led Research Collaborative for Long COVID
About the Patient-Generated Hypotheses JournalPatient-Led Research Collaborative
What Works for Health
Evidence matters. Our What Works for Health tool will help you find policies and programs that are a good fit for your community's priorities.
Evidence appraisal: a scoping review, conceptual framework, and research agenda
Abstract Objective Critical appraisal of clinical evidence promises to help prevent, detect, and address flaws related to study importance, ethics, validity, applicability, and reporting. These research issues are of growing concern. The purpose of this scoping review is to survey the current literature on evidence appraisal to develop a conceptual framework and an informatics research agenda. Methods We conducted an iterative literature search of Medline for discussion or research on the critical appraisal of clinical evidence. After title and abstract review, 121 articles were included in the analysis. We performed qualitative thematic analysis to describe the evidence appraisal architecture and its issues and opportunities. From this analysis, we derived a conceptual framework and an informatics research agenda. Results We identified 68 themes in 10 categories. This analysis revealed that the practice of evidence appraisal is quite common but is rarely subjected to documentation, organization, validation, integration, or uptake. This is related to underdeveloped tools, scant incentives, and insufficient acquisition of appraisal data and transformation of the data into usable knowledge. Discussion The gaps in acquiring appraisal data, transforming the data into actionable information and knowledge, and ensuring its dissemination and adoption can be addressed with proven informatics approaches. Conclusions Evidence appraisal faces several challenges, but implementing an informatics research agenda would likely help realize the potential of evidence appraisal for improving the rigor and value of clinical evidence.
Home
Evidence synthesis (ES) is the process of converting scientific outputs – such as articles, reports and data – into reliable and digestible evidence that can inform management or policy.
Correction of scientific literature: Too little, too late!
The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has highlighted the limitations of the current scientific publication system, in which serious post-publication concerns are often addressed too slowly to be effective. In this Perspective, we offer suggestions to improve academia’s willingness and ability to correct errors in an appropriate time frame.
Le management « evidence-based » comme technique d’autodéfense intellectuelle
Et si le management, pour se débarrasser de son image pseudo-scientifique, devenait « evidence-based », à l’instar de la médecine ? Une transformation nécessaire, mais difficile à mettre en œuvre.
