Iain Chalmers
Dados Biográficos
| ID | 4620237 |
|---|---|
| NOME | Iain Chalmers |
| PRENOMES | Iain |
| SOBRENOME | Chalmers |
| ASSINATURA | CHALMERS I |
| AFILIAÇÕES | James Lind Institute |
| ORCID | 0000-0002-9248-8490 |
| VERIFICADO | Sim |
| TOTAL DE OBRAS | 8 |
| TOTAL DE CITAÇÕES | 56 |
| TOTAL COMO AUTOR | 8 |
| TOTAL COMO EDITOR | 0 |
| PRIMEIRO ANO DE PUBLICAÇÃO | 2002 |
| ANO MAIS RECENTE DE PUBLICAÇÃO | 2021 |
| ÍNDICE H | 2 |
‘The ethics approval took 20 months on a trial which was meant to help terminally ill cancer patients. In the end we had to send the funding back’
BACKGROUND: We conducted a survey to identify what types of health/medical research could be exempt from research ethics reviews in Australia. METHODS: We surveyed Australian health/medical researchers and Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC) members. The survey asked whether respondents had previously changed or abandoned a project anticipating difficulties obtaining ethics approval, and presented eight research scenarios, asking whether these…
Increasing the Incidence and Influence of Systematic Reviews on Health Policy and Practice
Misrepresentation of the National Women’s Hospital in Auckland, New Zealand
http://ajph.aphapublications.org
How to increase value and reduce waste when research priorities are set
Avoidable waste in the production and reporting of research evidence
If evidence-informed policy works in practice, does it matter if it doesn’t work in theory
English Professionals and policy makers sometimes do more harm than good when they intervene in the lives of other people. This should prompt humility and efforts to ensure that policies and practices are informed by rigorous, transparent, up-to-date evaluations of relevant empirical evidence. Systematic reviews of relevant evidence must be designed to minimise the likelihood of confusing the effects of interventions with the effects of biases an…
Trying to do more Good than Harm in Policy and Practice
Because professionals sometimes do more harm than good when they intervene in the lives of other people, their policies and practices should be informed by rigorous, transparent, up-to-date evaluations. Surveys often reveal wide variations in the type and frequency of practice and policy interventions, and this evidence of collective uncertainty should prompt the humility that is a precondition for rigorous evaluation. Evaluation should begin wit…
A Brief History of Research Synthesis
Science is supposed to be cumulative, but scientists only rarely cumulate evidence scientifically. This means that users of research evidence have to cope with a plethora of reports of individual studies with no systematic attempt made to present new results in the context of similar studies. Although the need to synthesize research evidence has been recognized for well over two centuries, explicit methods for this form of research were not devel…
Trying to do more Good than Harm in Policy and Practice
Because professionals sometimes do more harm than good when they intervene in the lives of other people, their policies and practices should be informed by rigorous, transparent, up-to-date evaluations. Surveys often reveal wide variations in the type and frequency of practice and policy interventions, and this evidence of collective uncertainty should prompt the humility that is a precondition for rigorous evaluation. Evaluation should begin wit…
If evidence-informed policy works in practice, does it matter if it doesn’t work in theory
English Professionals and policy makers sometimes do more harm than good when they intervene in the lives of other people. This should prompt humility and efforts to ensure that policies and practices are informed by rigorous, transparent, up-to-date evaluations of relevant empirical evidence. Systematic reviews of relevant evidence must be designed to minimise the likelihood of confusing the effects of interventions with the effects of biases an…
A Brief History of Research Synthesis
Science is supposed to be cumulative, but scientists only rarely cumulate evidence scientifically. This means that users of research evidence have to cope with a plethora of reports of individual studies with no systematic attempt made to present new results in the context of similar studies. Although the need to synthesize research evidence has been recognized for well over two centuries, explicit methods for this form of research were not devel…
Trying to do more Good than Harm in Policy and Practice
Because professionals sometimes do more harm than good when they intervene in the lives of other people, their policies and practices should be informed by rigorous, transparent, up-to-date evaluations. Surveys often reveal wide variations in the type and frequency of practice and policy interventions, and this evidence of collective uncertainty should prompt the humility that is a precondition for rigorous evaluation. Evaluation should begin wit…
If evidence-informed policy works in practice, does it matter if it doesn’t work in theory
English Professionals and policy makers sometimes do more harm than good when they intervene in the lives of other people. This should prompt humility and efforts to ensure that policies and practices are informed by rigorous, transparent, up-to-date evaluations of relevant empirical evidence. Systematic reviews of relevant evidence must be designed to minimise the likelihood of confusing the effects of interventions with the effects of biases an…
Avoidable waste in the production and reporting of research evidence
How to increase value and reduce waste when research priorities are set
Increasing the Incidence and Influence of Systematic Reviews on Health Policy and Practice
Misrepresentation of the National Women’s Hospital in Auckland, New Zealand
http://ajph.aphapublications.org
‘The ethics approval took 20 months on a trial which was meant to help terminally ill cancer patients. In the end we had to send the funding back’
BACKGROUND: We conducted a survey to identify what types of health/medical research could be exempt from research ethics reviews in Australia. METHODS: We surveyed Australian health/medical researchers and Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC) members. The survey asked whether respondents had previously changed or abandoned a project anticipating difficulties obtaining ethics approval, and presented eight research scenarios, asking whether these…
Political science (6 obras) · Medicine (4 obras) · Psychology (4 obras) · Engineering (3 obras) · Engineering ethics (3 obras) · Law (3 obras) · MEDLINE (3 obras) · Public relations (3 obras) · Social Psychology (3 obras) · Computer Science (2 obras)