Lessons from working across fields to develop a framework for informed choices

In late 2018, Iain Chalmers, Andy Oxman and others from the Informed Health Choices team convened a cross-field forum to develop a generic framework of key concepts for thinking critically about claims, research and choices about interventions, with the aim of supporting ‘informed choices’. We define an informed choice as one that is based on critical understanding of the relevant available evidence. This paper describes the process of that cross-field engagement, and reflects on how consensus was reached on the generic framework. Working in an alliance of 24 researchers from across fields to develop the Key Concepts for Informed Choices framework, we learned three lessons about cross-field working: (1) there was much agreement, despite diversity of views and experiences; (2) the applications of our work were broader than we could have imagined; and (3) we identified a wide range of problems that we have in common when making informed choices. Here we describe our experience of working together to develop the framework, and draw out lessons for others who may be involved in similar cross-field initiatives

Key Concepts for making informed Choices

Teach people to think critically about claims and comparisons — they will make better decisions

Response to Cambridge Assessment's seminar on Critical Thinking, February 2010

In this article an experienced teacher of Critical Thinking discusses whether or not Critical Thinking could, or should, be 'embedded' into other subjects, rather than taught and assessed as a standalone subject in its own right

Critical Thinking - a definition and taxonomy for Cambridge Assessment

There are a vast number of Critical Thinking definitions in the literature, which are highly varied and often multi-faceted. The construct of Critical Thinking is hotly debated, with a number of key battlegrounds. The implications of such differing conceptions reach out beyond academic journals. They impact upon educationalists in a number of practical ways, such as devising the best training or delivery model for Critical Thinking; designing and delivering valid assessments which are authentic and which nurture good Critical Thinking skills in students. The main aim of this research was to create a Cambridge Assessment definition and taxonomy for Critical Thinking

Lessons from working across fields to develop a framework for informed choices

In late 2018, Iain Chalmers, Andy Oxman and others from the Informed Health Choices team convened a cross-field forum to develop a generic framework of key concepts for thinking critically about claims, research and choices about interventions, with the aim of supporting ‘informed choices’. We define an informed choice as one that is based on critical understanding of the relevant available evidence. This paper describes the process of that cross-field engagement, and reflects on how consensus was reached on the generic framework. Working in an alliance of 24 researchers from across fields to develop the Key Concepts for Informed Choices framework, we learned three lessons about cross-field working: (1) there was much agreement, despite diversity of views and experiences; (2) the applications of our work were broader than we could have imagined; and (3) we identified a wide range of problems that we have in common when making informed choices. Here we describe our experience of working together to develop the framework, and draw out lessons for others who may be involved in similar cross-field initiatives

Search for Scalar Diphoton Resonances in the Mass Range 65−60065-600 GeV with the ATLAS Detector in pppp Collision Data at s\sqrt{s} = 8 TeVTeV

A search for scalar particles decaying via narrow resonances into two photons in the mass range 65–600 GeV is performed using $20.3\text{}\text{}{\mathrm{fb}}^{-1}$ of $\sqrt{s}=8\text{}\text{}\mathrm{TeV}$ $pp$ collision data collected with the ATLAS detector at the Large Hadron Collider. The recently discovered Higgs boson is treated as a background. No significant evidence for an additional signal is observed. The results are presented as limits at the 95% confidence level on the production cross section of a scalar boson times branching ratio into two photons, in a fiducial volume where the reconstruction efficiency is approximately independent of the event topology. The upper limits set extend over a considerably wider mass range than previous searches