Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

Evaluating research for clinical significance: using critically appraised topics to enhance evidence-based neuropsychology.
Clin Neuropsychol. 2014; 28(4):653-68.CN

Abstract

Meehl's (1973, Psychodiagnosis: Selected papers. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press) distinction between statistical and clinical significance holds special relevance for evidence-based neuropsychological practice. Meehl argued that despite attaining statistical significance, many published findings have limited practical value since they do not inform clinical care. In the context of an ever expanding clinical research literature, accessible methods to evaluate clinical impact are needed. The method of Critically Appraised Topics (Straus, Richardson, Glasziou, & Haynes, 2011, Evidence-based medicine: How to practice and teach EBM (4th ed.). Edinburgh: Elsevier Churchill-Livingstone) was developed to provide clinicians with a "toolkit" to facilitate implementation of evidence-based practice. We illustrate the Critically Appraised Topics method using a dementia screening example. We argue that the skills practiced through critical appraisal provide clinicians with methods to: (1) evaluate the clinical relevance of new or unfamiliar research findings with a focus on patient benefit, (2) help focus of research quality, and (3) incorporate evaluation of clinical impact into educational and professional development activities.

Authors+Show Affiliations

a Melbourne School of Psychological Sciences , University of Melbourne , Melbourne , Australia .No affiliation info availableNo affiliation info available

Pub Type(s)

Journal Article

Language

eng

PubMed ID

23463942

Citation

Bowden, Stephen C., et al. "Evaluating Research for Clinical Significance: Using Critically Appraised Topics to Enhance Evidence-based Neuropsychology." The Clinical Neuropsychologist, vol. 28, no. 4, 2014, pp. 653-68.
Bowden SC, Harrison EJ, Loring DW. Evaluating research for clinical significance: using critically appraised topics to enhance evidence-based neuropsychology. Clin Neuropsychol. 2014;28(4):653-68.
Bowden, S. C., Harrison, E. J., & Loring, D. W. (2014). Evaluating research for clinical significance: using critically appraised topics to enhance evidence-based neuropsychology. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 28(4), 653-68. https://doi.org/10.1080/13854046.2013.776636
Bowden SC, Harrison EJ, Loring DW. Evaluating Research for Clinical Significance: Using Critically Appraised Topics to Enhance Evidence-based Neuropsychology. Clin Neuropsychol. 2014;28(4):653-68. PubMed PMID: 23463942.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - Evaluating research for clinical significance: using critically appraised topics to enhance evidence-based neuropsychology. AU - Bowden,Stephen C, AU - Harrison,Elise J, AU - Loring,David W, Y1 - 2013/03/07/ PY - 2013/3/8/entrez PY - 2013/3/8/pubmed PY - 2014/9/10/medline KW - Continuing education KW - Decision-making KW - Diagnostic validity KW - Evidence-based practice KW - Research methods SP - 653 EP - 68 JF - The Clinical neuropsychologist JO - Clin Neuropsychol VL - 28 IS - 4 N2 - Meehl's (1973, Psychodiagnosis: Selected papers. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press) distinction between statistical and clinical significance holds special relevance for evidence-based neuropsychological practice. Meehl argued that despite attaining statistical significance, many published findings have limited practical value since they do not inform clinical care. In the context of an ever expanding clinical research literature, accessible methods to evaluate clinical impact are needed. The method of Critically Appraised Topics (Straus, Richardson, Glasziou, & Haynes, 2011, Evidence-based medicine: How to practice and teach EBM (4th ed.). Edinburgh: Elsevier Churchill-Livingstone) was developed to provide clinicians with a "toolkit" to facilitate implementation of evidence-based practice. We illustrate the Critically Appraised Topics method using a dementia screening example. We argue that the skills practiced through critical appraisal provide clinicians with methods to: (1) evaluate the clinical relevance of new or unfamiliar research findings with a focus on patient benefit, (2) help focus of research quality, and (3) incorporate evaluation of clinical impact into educational and professional development activities. SN - 1744-4144 UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/23463942/Evaluating_research_for_clinical_significance:_using_critically_appraised_topics_to_enhance_evidence-based_neuropsychology L2 - http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13854046.2013.776636 DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -
Try the Free App:
Prime PubMed app for iOS iPhone iPad
Prime PubMed app for Android
Prime PubMed is provided
free to individuals by:
Unbound Medicine.