2015 Submitted Workshop Abstracts

Students 4 Best Evidence: A global community advocating for evidence
Monday April 13th 11:00
Holly Millward, Martin Burton
UK Cochrane Centre, Oxford, UK
Introduction: Students 4 Best Evidence (S4BE) is an online community for students interested in evidence-based health care, it aims to help students learn more about evidence-based practice and the methodological concepts underpinning it. S4BE involves students from school age to university through relevant, useful resources as well as being a space for them to communicate their knowledge and interact with fellow students.
Aims: In April 2015, S4BE will launch a year long campaign to ‘advocate for evidence’. The aim of the mission is to ignite student champions globally, to fight for evidence, to spread understanding on the use of evidence and show how it can improve global health. We will do this through a series of mini events and projects throughout the year. We would like to launch this mission at Evidence Live 2015.
Results: We want the mission to result in improved understanding of evidence and the concepts used in evidence-based practice. We seek to strengthen the S4BE community with a new group of student champions, willing to ‘advocate for evidence’.
Conclusions: We would like to build on the success of blogs like, ‘A beginners guide to interpreting odds ratios, confidence intervals and p values’, that has been viewed over 100,000 times since publication in August 2013 and make sure students know how to campaign successfully for best evidence.

Rayyan – Systematic Reviews on Steroids
Monday April 13th 15:30
Mourad Ouzzani¹, Hossam Hamady¹, Zbys Fedorwicz^2
1Qatar Computing Research Institute, Doha, Qatar, ²The Bahrain Branch of The Cochrane Collaboration, Muscat,
Introduction: The future of global health will depend on the delivery of effective, cost-efficient healthcare services which are informed by high-quality, up-to-date evidence-based clinical resources. Timely availability and rapid dissemination of these resources can be better achieved through more efficient sharing/evaluation of relevant primary research and ultimately its expeditious distillation into Systematic Reviews and clinical guidelines. Preliminary screening of searches is the most time consuming aspect. Systematic Reviewers use a variety of approaches (manual/electronic) but no single method satisfactorily fulfills the principal requirements of speed with accuracy.
Aims: Rayyan (https://rayyan.qcri.org) is a FREE web-based application that helps systematic reviewers expedite their reviews in a simple and intuitive fashion.
Methods: Beta-testing of Rayyan was undertaken by a diverse group of researchers/patient advocacy groups on a wide range of Cochrane reviews (250 to 5.5K citations). Rayyan enables rapid citation screening  via ‘on-line’ contemporaneous sharing of decisions by reviewers on studies to be included/excluded, significantly reducing the time required to complete preliminary filtering of searches. Rayyan permits individualized labelling of reviewers’ agreements and disagreements against inclusion criteria and provides real-time automatic suggestions for studies to be considered for inclusion in the review. This built-in prediction feature used in conjunction with the word cloud, further accelerates identification of additional potentially eligible studies until screening is completed.
Results: Rayyan has over 100  users with 100+  reviews. Ease-of-use, ability to quickly sift through large sets of studies, and an intuitive user-interface were key features highlighted by the beta-testers. The inclusion/exclusion prediction algorithm was tested on publicly available systematic reviews, demonstrating an average saving of 50% on the time needed for  initial screening with a 95% sensitivity (recall).

Open Trials
Tuesday April 14th 12:30
Ben Goldacre & Open Knowledge
Objective:  To discuss an early phase of the new Open Trials project: a database and website which aims to gather, link, and present all data and documents on all trials.
Description: The Open Trials project launched on 1 April 2015. It aims to produce an open, easy-to-use, linked database of information about the world’s clinical trials, drawing together information from multiple sources, inviting crowdsourced additions, and presenting the information in various formats to various communities. The overall aim of the project is to improve access to information about trials, and to increase transparency.

There are various things a user-friendly database of documents and data on clinical trials can help achieve:
-it helps to identify knowledge gaps, by identifying completed trials without results;
– it helps produce leaderboards on the drugs/investigators/sponsors with the most withheld data
– it helps to identify biased outcome reporting, by presenting various different reports on a trial’s results side by side
– it helps to make other documents about a trial, such as consent forms and protocols, more easily discoverable
– it provides a user friendly home for existing structured data that has been created about a trial
– it creates a platform where users can annotate trials with additional information

This highly interactive workshop invites participation from patients, researchers, doctors, campaigners, regulators and other interested stakeholders.  Ben Goldacre will share our plans for the project, and then Open Knowledge will facilitate an interactive workshop aiming to answer the following questions:
– what are we doing right?
– what are we doing  wrong?
–  how can we do it better?
– what problems might this project help solve for you?
– what features would you like us to implement for you?

Please bring your laptop to this session.  No specialised technical knowledge is required

Applied Cinematherapy: The Patient-Audience Relationship and the Space in Between
Tuesday April 14th 14:30
Ruth Manasseh^1
1The University of Essex, Essex, UK, ²British Psychoanalytic Council, London, UK, ³Brith Psychotherapy Foundation, London, UK
This NHS supported research explores my original clinical methodology as formulated over several years working in psychological trauma and as a filmmaker. I call it Applied Cinematherapy (AC).
My aim was to investigate the effects of using film extracts as a supplement to analytic group work with severely traumatised patients who remain in impasse, despite having undergone previous pharmaceutical, cognitive and psychodynamic interventions – all pre-requisite patient inclusion criteria for the clinical trial.
The key innovation of AC is the controlled way film extracts were introduced into a traditional brief, trauma-focused, group psychotherapy setting governed by established psychoanalytic psychotherapy practices.
The thesis examines whether implementation of this form of therapy is possible, what effects it has on the group and individual process, and what indications there are of the mechanisms that might be at work in creating these effects.
When defining the methodology, I conceptualised the Patient-Audience Relationship (PAR) (Manasseh, 2010)to describe the theoretical space created between the patient (as a patient) and the patient as an audience when extracts from films are introduced into therapy. PAR is founded on three established psychoanalytic concepts: Transitional space and object (Winnicott, 1953); Third position and internal triangular space (Britton, 2004); and Reverie (Bion, 1962). My hypothesis was that PAR, might help trigger identificatory processes that could be utilised in therapy to enhance the patients’ ability to reflect, without being too overwhelmed.
My findings, indicate that AC enabled a containing, transitional space for the patients to gradually work through the more concealed parts of their trauma. From being a central preoccupation, the patients’ trauma became more integrated with other parts of their everyday life.
Applied Cinematherapy potentially offers a way for trauma patients who are in impasse to re-engage in treatment through PAR.
Keywords: PAR, applied cinematherapy, trauma, impasse, film extracts, psychoanalytic psychotherapy.
Conclusions: This WORKSHOP  will provide an opportunity for participants to fully experience the infinite customizability, ease of use and intuitive interface built into Rayyan.

Rapid Reviews: A Practical Knowledge Synthesis Tool for Decision Makers
Tuesday April 14th 14:30
Chantelle Garritty¹, Valerie King², Julie Polisena^3
1Ottawa Hospital Research Institute (OHRI), Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, ²Center for Evidence-based Policy, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon, USA, ³Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (CADTH), Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Introduction: Rapid reviews (RRs) are increasingly being employed as a research tool to support evidence-informed decision making in a timely manner. Despite their growing use,  there is not universal consensus on how they should be defined, conducted, or utilized.
Aims: This workshop aims 1) to develop an understanding of the need for, and utility of, RRs as a useful knowledge synthesis product; 2) to detail underlying methodology approaches; and 3) to explore practical issues that have emerged based on the collective experiences of three health care organizations that have been providing RR products as part of a suite of knowledge synthesis services for several years.
Methods:  Participants will be introduced to RR methodology as a mode of knowledge synthesis including a look at the RR landscape and an overview of the process of conducting them. Participants will have the opportunity to review sample reports prepared for specific health care contexts and will be encouraged to discuss the methods and report formats. In addition, in small working groups, participants will be presented with an emergent health issue that requires a timely decision and asked to define how they would address this issue using a RR approach from either the perspective of a health authority, or from the vantage point of a team developing a RR protocol.
Results: Participants will need to consider question development, appropriateness of the search strategy and selection criteria, data analysis, type and feasibility of syntheses, report layout and transparency, and policy implications discussed according to the evidence. Logistical considerations and process issues will also be discussed.
Conclusions: Attendees will better understand the process and practical issues involved the conduct of RRs. The workshop is directly applicable to researchers, policy analysts, and other decision makers wanting to use the results of RRs to inform emergent and urgent decisions.