Systematic reviews seek to identify and summarise all the relevant research evidence relating to the clinical or health policy decision under consideration. This rationale can be fatally undermined if the review only includes a proportion of the research conducted, due to the restricted availability of data...
People facing life threatening illness have a right to expect that research into their illness will address the uncertainties that matter most to them. Unfortunately, this is not always the case, as Alessandro Liberati (1954-2012) describes in this editorial, first published in The Lancet, building on his own experience as a patient ...
Cochrane Reviews are essential tools for accurately summarising the evidence of the effects of healthcare interventions in a way that minimises bias. In addition to occasionally providing clear clinical answers, when several smaller apparently conflicting studies are brought together, such reviews are a rich resource for people planning to fund or undertake future healthcare research.
As we watch the aftermath of the recent earthquake in Turkey and the ongoing flooding in Thailand, the need for reliable information on the effects of interventions and actions, by people engaged in disaster planning and response, feels ever more pressing. Evidence Aid, a global initiative that arose within The Cochrane Collaboration, is trying to meet this need ...
A variety of international organisations, funders, and others have made calls for sharing research data. These calls have mostly been restricted to publicly funded research, but if the over-riding objective of healthcare research is to improve patient care and health policy, the distinction between publicly funded research and industry-funded research is artificial and irrelevant...
| Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat |
| 01 | 02 | 03 | 04 | |||
| 05 | 06 | 07 | 08 | 09 | 10 | 11 |
| 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 |
| 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 |
| 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 |