
How to get published?
25th May 2016In the run up to Evidence Live 2016, The BMJ are running a series of blogs by the speakers at the conference discussing what they will be speaking about… The highlight
In the run up to Evidence Live 2016, The BMJ are running a series of blogs by the speakers at the conference discussing what they will be speaking about… The highlight
By Peter Gill Recently I had the opportunity to attend an annual research competition which brought together paediatric trainees from across Canada. It was an inspirational event for several reasons:
Around the world, healthcare is rapidly becoming unaffordable. In the US, for example, per capita Medicare spending grows at an at average of 3.5% annually(1). In universal health services, health
Leading up to Evidence Live 2016, we will be publishing a series of blog posts highlighting projects, initiatives and innovative ideas from future leaders in evidence based medicine. Please read
Poor quality evidence, lack of affordability and uninformed patients suggest an awful lot of research doesn’t actually matter. However, for informing better decisions when presented with a piece of evidence
The first two articles in this series pointed out we need better and more affordable evidence. Yet, even if affordable high quality evidence is forthcoming it is imperative that patients
Part 1 of this series pointed out we need better research to support better decisions. Market forces, though, may not be helping decision-making as new treatments – particularly drugs –
The campaign starts at EvidenceLive 2016 – with an open meeting to prioritise and explore the potential solutions to better evidence for better decisions. At the core of evidence-based medicine
The Gift of Evidence The greatest gift Evidence-Based Health Care bestows is the power to critically appraise Health Science. I learned from Oxford that the most powerful teaching is that
When I tell people about my research group’s systematic review of systematic reviews, also known as an ‘overview’, my colleagues often reply “why not do a ‘regular’ review‘?” In 1979