Disseminating the best available evidence: New challenges in public reporting of health care

As a direct benefit of the Health Care Reform Act (2010), concerted effort has been deployed to define and characterize the process by which the best available evidence for diagnosis or treatment intervention prognosis can be obtained. The science of research synthesis in health care has established the systematic research protocol by which randomized clinical trials and other clinical studies must be reviewed and compared for the level and quality of the evidence presented, as well as the consensus of the best available evidence synthesized and shared. This process of systematic review yields a reliable and valid approach in comparing different interventions and strategies to prevent, diagnose, treat and monitor health conditions in terms of efficacy, and or of effectiveness. The resulting bioinformation outcome of comparative effectiveness and efficacy research review of the available clinical data is expressed as a consensus of the best available evidence, which finds its way in evidence-based clinical practice guidelines, standards of care and eventually, in policies: hence, the acronym CEERAP (comparative effectiveness and efficacy review and policy). The methodological and the procedural criteria that determine and regulate the public reporting dissemination of this sort of bioinformation, and the extent of benefit to the patient's health literacy, which have remained a bit more elusive to this date, are investigated and discussed in this paper

Proteomic signature of periodontal disease in pregnancy: Predictive validity for adverse outcomes

The rate of preterm birth is a public health concern worldwide because it is increasing and efforts to prevent it have failed. We report a Clinically Relevant Complex Systematic Review (CSCSR) designed to identify and evaluate the best available evidence in support of the association between periodontal status in women and pregnancy outcome of preterm low birth weight. We hypothesize that the traditional limits of research synthesis must be expanded to incorporate a translational component. As a proof-of-concept model, we propose that this CSCSR can yield greater validity of efficacy and effectiveness through supplementing its recommendations with data of the proteomic signature of periodontal disease in pregnancy, which can contribute to addressing specifically the predictive validity for adverse outcomes. For this CRCSR, systematic reviews were identified through The National Library of MedicinePubmed, The Cochrane library, CINAHL, Google Scholar, Web of Science, and the American Dental Association web library. Independent reviewers quantified the relevance and quality of this literature with R-AMSTAR. Homogeneity and inter-rater reliability testing were supplemented with acceptable sampling analysis. Research synthesis outcomes were analyzed qualitatively toward a Bayesian inference, and converge to demonstrate a definite association between maternal periodontal disease and pregnancy outcome. This CRCSR limits heterogeneity in terms of periodontal disease, outcome measure, selection bias, uncontrolled confounders and effect modifiers. Taken together, the translational CRCSR model we propose suggests that further research is advocated to explore the fundamental mechanisms underlying this association, from a molecular and proteomic perspective

Osteoimmunopathology in HIV/AIDS: A Translational Evidence-Based Perspective

Infection with the human immunodeficiency virus-1 (HIV) and the resulting acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS) alter not only cellular immune regulation but also the bone metabolism. Since cellular immunity and bone metabolism are intimately intertwined in the osteoimmune network, it is to be expected that bone metabolism is also affected in patients with HIV/AIDS. The concerted evidence points convincingly toward impaired activity of osteoblasts and increased activity of osteoclasts in patients with HIV/AIDS, leading to a significant increase in the prevalence of osteoporosis. Research attributes these outcomes in part at least to the ART, PI, and HAART therapies endured by these patients. We review and discuss these lines of evidence from the perspective of translational clinically relevant complex systematic reviews for comparative effectiveness analysis and evidence-based intervention on a global scale

Expanding the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (Ex-GRADE) for Evidence-Based Clinical Recommendations: Validation Study

Clinicians use general practice guidelines as a source of support for their intervention, but how much confidence should they place on these recommendations? How much confidence should patients place on these recommendations? Various instruments are available to assess the quality of evidence of research, such as the revised Wong scale (R-Wong) which examines the quality of research design, methodology and data analysis, and the revision of the assessment of multiple systematic reviews (R-AMSTAR), which examines the quality of systematic reviews

Disseminating the best available evidence: New challenges in public reporting of health care.

As a direct benefit of the Health Care Reform Act (2010), concerted effort has been deployed to define and characterize the process by which the best available evidence for diagnosis or treatment intervention prognosis can be obtained. The science of research synthesis in health care has established the systematic research protocol by which randomized clinical trials and other clinical studies must be reviewed and compared for the level and quality of the evidence presented, as well as the consensus of the best available evidence synthesized and shared. This process of systematic review yields a reliable and valid approach in comparing different interventions and strategies to prevent, diagnose, treat and monitor health conditions in terms of efficacy, and or of effectiveness. The resulting bioinformation outcome of comparative effectiveness and efficacy research review of the available clinical data is expressed as a consensus of the best available evidence, which finds its way in evidence-based clinical practice guidelines, standards of care and eventually, in policies: hence, the acronym CEERAP (comparative effectiveness and efficacy review and policy). The methodological and the procedural criteria that determine and regulate the public reporting dissemination of this sort of bioinformation, and the extent of benefit to the patient's health literacy, which have remained a bit more elusive to this date, are investigated and discussed in this paper

Proteomic signature of periodontal disease in pregnancy: Predictive validity for adverse outcomes.

The rate of preterm birth is a public health concern worldwide because it is increasing and efforts to prevent it have failed. We report a Clinically Relevant Complex Systematic Review (CSCSR) designed to identify and evaluate the best available evidence in support of the association between periodontal status in women and pregnancy outcome of preterm low birth weight. We hypothesize that the traditional limits of research synthesis must be expanded to incorporate a translational component. As a proof-of-concept model, we propose that this CSCSR can yield greater validity of efficacy and effectiveness through supplementing its recommendations with data of the proteomic signature of periodontal disease in pregnancy, which can contribute to addressing specifically the predictive validity for adverse outcomes. For this CRCSR, systematic reviews were identified through The National Library of MedicinePubmed, The Cochrane library, CINAHL, Google Scholar, Web of Science, and the American Dental Association web library. Independent reviewers quantified the relevance and quality of this literature with R-AMSTAR. Homogeneity and inter-rater reliability testing were supplemented with acceptable sampling analysis. Research synthesis outcomes were analyzed qualitatively toward a Bayesian inference, and converge to demonstrate a definite association between maternal periodontal disease and pregnancy outcome. This CRCSR limits heterogeneity in terms of periodontal disease, outcome measure, selection bias, uncontrolled confounders and effect modifiers. Taken together, the translational CRCSR model we propose suggests that further research is advocated to explore the fundamental mechanisms underlying this association, from a molecular and proteomic perspective

Detection and proportion of very early dental caries in independent living older adults

Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/115933/1/lsm22411_am.pdfhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/115933/2/lsm22411.pd

Reliability of Quality Assessments in Research Synthesis: Securing the Highest Quality Bioinformation for HIT.

Current trends in bio-medicine include research synthesis and dissemination of bioinformation by means of health (bio) information technology (H[b] IT). Research must secure the validity and reliability of assessment tools to quantify research quality in the pursuit of the best available evidence. Our concerted work in this domain led to the revision of three instruments for that purpose, including the stringent characterization of inter-rater reliability and coefficient of agreement. It is timely and critical to advance the methodological development of the science of research synthesis by strengthening the reliability of existing measure of research quality in order to ensure H[b] IT efficacy and effectiveness