首页> 外文期刊>Comparative Effectiveness Research >Evidence-based research: understanding the best estimate
【24h】

Evidence-based research: understanding the best estimate

机译:循证研究:了解最佳估计

获取原文
       

摘要

Introduction: Best estimates of intervention outcomes are used when uncertainties in decision making are evidenced. Best estimates are often, out of necessity, from a context of less than quality evidence or needing more evidence to provide accuracy. Purpose: The purpose of this article is to understand the best estimate behavior, so that clinicians and patients may have confidence in its quantification and validation. Methods: To discover best estimates and quantify uncertainty, critical appraisals of the literature, gray literature and its resources, or both are accomplished. Best estimates of pairwise comparisons are calculated using meta-analytic methods; multiple comparisons use network meta-analysis. Manufacturers provide margins of performance of proprietary material(s). Lower margin performance thresholds or requirements (functional failure) of materials are determined by a distribution of tests to quantify performance or clinical competency. The same is done for the high margin performance thresholds (estimated true value of success) and clinician-derived critical values (material failure to function clinically). This quantification of margins and uncertainties assists clinicians in determining if reported best estimates are progressing toward true value as new knowledge is reported. Analysis: The best estimate of outcomes focuses on evidence-centered care. In stochastic environments, we are not able to observe all events in all situations to know without uncertainty the best estimates of predictable outcomes. Point-in-time analyses of best estimates using quantification of margins and uncertainties do this. Conclusion: While study design and methodology are variables known to validate the quality of evidence from which best estimates are acquired, missing are tolerance margins, or upper and lower performance requirements and clinician critical values, within which best estimates behave and are validated. Understanding the best estimate behavior toward true value may provide clinicians and patients confidence in decision making under uncertainty.
机译:简介:当决策存在不确定性时,将使用干预结果的最佳估计。最佳估计常常是出于必要,而不是质量证据不足或需要更多证据来提供准确性的情况。目的:本文的目的是了解最佳估计行为,以便临床医生和患者对其量化和验证充满信心。方法:为了发现最佳估计值并量化不确定性,需要对文献,灰色文献及其资源或两者进行严格评估。成对比较的最佳估计是使用荟萃分析方法计算的;多重比较使用网络荟萃分析。制造商提供专有材料的性能余量。较低的边际性能阈值或材料要求(功能失效)取决于测试分布以量化性能或临床能力。对于高边际绩效阈值(成功的估计真实价值)和临床医生得出的临界值(临床上无法发挥实质性作用),也要进行同样的操作。边际和不确定性的这种量化有助于临床医生确定在报告新知识时,报告的最佳估计是否正在朝着真实价值发展。分析:对结果的最佳估计集中在以证据为中心的护理上。在随机环境中,我们无法观察所有情况下的所有事件,而无法毫无疑问地了解可预测结果的最佳估计。使用边际和不确定性的量化对最佳估计进行时间点分析。结论:虽然研究设计和方法学是可以验证从中获得最佳估计的证据质量的变量,但缺失的是公差范围,或较高和较低的性能要求以及临床医生的临界值,在这些范围内可以进行最佳估计并得到验证。了解朝着真实价值的最佳估计行为可能会为临床医生和患者提供不确定性下决策的信心。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号