4 found
Paul Glasziou [3]Paul P. Glasziou [1]
  1. Problems with using mechanisms to solve the problem of extrapolation.Jeremy Howick, Paul Glasziou & Jeffrey K. Aronson - 2013 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 34 (4):275-291.
    Proponents of evidence-based medicine and some philosophers of science seem to agree that knowledge of mechanisms can help solve the problem of applying results of controlled studies to target populations (‘the problem of extrapolation’). We describe the problem of extrapolation, characterize mechanisms, and outline how mechanistic knowledge might be used to solve the problem. Our main thesis is that there are four often overlooked problems with using mechanistic knowledge to solve the problem of extrapolation. First, our understanding of mechanisms is (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
    Export citation  
    Bookmark   27 citations  
  2.  20
    A model for reflection for good clinical practice.John I. Balla, Carl Heneghan, Paul Glasziou, Matthew Thompson & Margaret E. Balla - 2009 - Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice 15 (6):964-969.
  3.  5
    Updating standards for reporting diagnostic accuracy: the development of STARD 2015.Patrick M. M. Bossuyt, Lotty Hooft, Douglas G. Altman, Henrica C. W. de Vet, David Moher, Les Irwig, Paul P. Glasziou, Constantine A. Gatsonis, David E. Bruns, Johannes B. Reitsma, Jérémie F. Cohen & Daniël A. Korevaar - 2016 - Research Integrity and Peer Review 1 (1).
    BackgroundAlthough the number of reporting guidelines has grown rapidly, few have gone through an updating process. The STARD statement, published in 2003 to help improve the transparency and completeness of reporting of diagnostic accuracy studies, was recently updated in a systematic way. Here, we describe the steps taken and a justification for the changes made.ResultsA 4-member Project Team coordinated the updating process; a 14-member Steering Committee was regularly solicited by the Project Team when making critical decisions. First, a review of (...)
    No categories
    Direct download  
    Export citation  
  4.  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’: a survey of views on human research ethics reviews.Anna Mae Scott, Iain Chalmers, Adrian Barnett, Alexandre Stephens, Simon E. Kolstoe, Justin Clark & Paul Glasziou - 2021 - Journal of Medical Ethics 47 (12):e90-e90.
    BackgroundWe conducted a survey to identify what types of health/medical research could be exempt from research ethics reviews in Australia.MethodsWe surveyed Australian health/medical researchers and Human Research Ethics Committee 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 scenarios should or should not be exempt from ethics review, and to provide comments. Qualitative data were analysed thematically; quantitative data in R.ResultsWe received 514 responses. (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
    Export citation