Skip to main content

Evidence-Based Practice: Additional Resources

Qualty of Research

Bias in Research

Tutorial

Univeristy of Texas Heath Science Center
San Antonio

BEWARE ! Check Source For Bias

When searching for EVIDENCE in the literature, don't believe everything you see.

The following journal issue is an example of an entire journal created by Elsevier (publisher) at the request of Merck (pharmaceuticals). Although the contents look evidential and impressive, the issue is biased (manufactured for profit).

Australasian Journal of Bone & Joint Medicine
Vol 2, Issue 1, 2003

Retraction Watch

Retraction Watch

Blog by Adam Marcus and Ivan Oransky.

"Tracking retractions as a window into the scientific process"

Loading

Qualitative :: Quantitatve Research

Do you have trouble distinguishing between Qualitative research and Quantitative research? Take a look at the document below for help.

BEWARE ! Investigate Raw Data

When searching for EVIDENCE in the literature, don't believe everything you see.

The following 2 articles are original research written by a well-known researcher. Experts in the field of cloning requested access to his raw data. He couldn't provide it because he had 'created' it.  Both articles have been retracted by the publisher.

Evidence of a pluripotent human embryonic stem cell line derived from a cloned blastocyst.
Hwang WS, Ryu YJ, Park JH, et al.
Science.  12;303(5664):1669-74.   Mar 2004

Patient-specific embryonic stem cells derived from human SCNT blastocysts.
Hwang WS, Roh SI, Lee BC, et al
Science.  17;308(5729):1777-83.   June 2005

BEWARE ! Review Methodology Carefully

When searching for EVIDENCE in the literature, don't believe everything you see.

These next 2 articles focus on the autism / vaccine debate. The Wakefield article is the orignal article that ignited the debate. The second article is a scientific rebuttal based on epidemiological methodology. The Wakefield article was retracted in February 2010, but the debate continues.

Original research article:
Ileal-lymphoid-nodular hyperplasia, non-specific colitis, and pervasive developmental disorder in children.
Wakefield, A. J., Murch, S. H., Anthony, A., et al. (1998).
Lancet, 351(9103), 637.

Rebuttal:
Vaccine adverse events: causal or coincidental?
Chen, R.T. & DeStefano, F. (1998). 
Lancet 351: 611-12.

Sensitivity / Specificity

When determining / measuring the accuracy of a tool, researchers must be aware of two gauges:

SENSITIVITY

Sensitivity represents the proportion of truly diseased persons in a screened population who are identified as being diseased by the test. It is a measure of the probability of correctly diagnosing a condition. (Dictionary of Epidemiology, 2d ed)

[Also know as 'Recall Rate' or correctly identified positives]

SPECIFITY

Specificity is the proportion of truly nondiseased persons who are so identified by the screening test. It is a measure of the probability of correctly identifying a nondiseased person. (Dictionary of Epidemiology, 2d ed)

[identified negatives]

EBP Delima

EBP Delimma CINAHL Venn diagram
Pravikoff, D.S. (2004) The Evidence-Based Practice Dilemma. CINAHLnews 23(1):6-7
"Teaching the Clinician to Fish" PowerPoint