翻訳と辞書
Words near each other
・ "O" Is for Outlaw
・ "O"-Jung.Ban.Hap.
・ "Ode-to-Napoleon" hexachord
・ "Oh Yeah!" Live
・ "Our Contemporary" regional art exhibition (Leningrad, 1975)
・ "P" Is for Peril
・ "Pimpernel" Smith
・ "Polish death camp" controversy
・ "Pro knigi" ("About books")
・ "Prosopa" Greek Television Awards
・ "Pussy Cats" Starring the Walkmen
・ "Q" Is for Quarry
・ "R" Is for Ricochet
・ "R" The King (2016 film)
・ "Rags" Ragland
・ ! (album)
・ ! (disambiguation)
・ !!
・ !!!
・ !!! (album)
・ !!Destroy-Oh-Boy!!
・ !Action Pact!
・ !Arriba! La Pachanga
・ !Hero
・ !Hero (album)
・ !Kung language
・ !Oka Tokat
・ !PAUS3
・ !T.O.O.H.!
・ !Women Art Revolution


Dictionary Lists
翻訳と辞書 辞書検索 [ 開発暫定版 ]
スポンサード リンク

hierarchy of evidence : ウィキペディア英語版
hierarchy of evidence
Evidence hierarchies reflect the relative authority of various types of biomedical research. Although there is no single, universally-accepted hierarchy of evidence,〔Two examples of evidence hierarchies can be found in the qualification of evidence section of the Wikipedia article on evidence-based medicine.〕 there is broad agreement on the relative strength of the principal types of research, or epidemiological studies. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) rank above observational studies, while expert opinion and anecdotal experience are ranked at the bottom. Some evidence hierarchies place systematic review and meta analysis above RCTs, since these often combine data from multiple RCTs, and possibly from other study types as well. Evidence hierarchies are integral to evidence-based medicine.
The use of evidence hierarchies has been criticized as allowing RCTs too much authority. Not all research questions can be answered through RCTs, either because of practical issues or because of ethical issues. Moreover, even when evidence is available from high-quality RCTs, evidence from other study types may still be relevant.
Greenhalgh suggests that
"the relative weight carried by the different types of primary study when making decisions about clinical interventions (the “hierarchy of evidence”) puts them in the following order:
# Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of "RCTs with definitive results".
# RCTs with definitive results (confidence intervals that do not overlap the threshold clinically significant effect)
# RCTs with non-definitive results (a point estimate that suggests a clinically significant effect but with confidence intervals overlapping the threshold for this effect)
# Cohort studies
# Case-control studies
# Cross sectional surveys
# Case reports

== References ==


抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア(Wikipedia)
ウィキペディアで「hierarchy of evidence」の詳細全文を読む



スポンサード リンク
翻訳と辞書 : 翻訳のためのインターネットリソース

Copyright(C) kotoba.ne.jp 1997-2016. All Rights Reserved.