Applying an evidence-based approach to the management of patients with ocular hypertension: Evaluating and synthesizing published evidence

Anne L. Coleman, Kuldev Singh, Richard Wilson, George A. Cioffi, David S Friedman, Robert N. Weinreb

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Purpose The use of evidence-based medicine in managing patients with ocular hypertension has been constrained by the limited availability of high-quality data from controlled clinical trials and by limited formal training of clinicians in evaluating published evidence. This article will provide strategies and techniques to evaluate critically the quality of published research, synthesize the findings, and integrate published evidence in the care of patients with ocular hypertension. Design Review of the published literature and consensus of a panel of experts. Methods The published literature on evidence-based medicine was reviewed. Strategies and techniques in evaluating the quality of evidence and how to integrate evidence into the practice setting using the following three major questions were discussed by a panel of experts: Are the results of the study valid? What are the results? Do the study outcomes apply to individual patient care? Results Approaches to assessing study validity and the importance of considering the size of the treatment effect and precision of the effect size were detailed. The importance of using the "number-needed-to-treat" as a tool for translating results of clinical trials to individual patient care and the "number-needed-to-harm" as a method of comparing the potential benefit and harm of a given therapy was acknowledged. Conclusion As the volume of high-quality data increases, the information provided herein may help ophthalmologists apply evidence-based medicine techniques as they seek to optimize the care of individual patients with ocular hypertension.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalAmerican Journal of Ophthalmology
Volume138
Issue number3 SUPPL.
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 2004

Fingerprint

Ocular Hypertension
Evidence-Based Medicine
Patient Care
Numbers Needed To Treat
Controlled Clinical Trials
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
Clinical Trials
Therapeutics
Research
Data Accuracy

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Ophthalmology

Cite this

Applying an evidence-based approach to the management of patients with ocular hypertension : Evaluating and synthesizing published evidence. / Coleman, Anne L.; Singh, Kuldev; Wilson, Richard; Cioffi, George A.; Friedman, David S; Weinreb, Robert N.

In: American Journal of Ophthalmology, Vol. 138, No. 3 SUPPL., 09.2004.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Coleman, Anne L. ; Singh, Kuldev ; Wilson, Richard ; Cioffi, George A. ; Friedman, David S ; Weinreb, Robert N. / Applying an evidence-based approach to the management of patients with ocular hypertension : Evaluating and synthesizing published evidence. In: American Journal of Ophthalmology. 2004 ; Vol. 138, No. 3 SUPPL.
@article{f2ba38f800da458fbceae6d2ad91fd2b,
title = "Applying an evidence-based approach to the management of patients with ocular hypertension: Evaluating and synthesizing published evidence",
abstract = "Purpose The use of evidence-based medicine in managing patients with ocular hypertension has been constrained by the limited availability of high-quality data from controlled clinical trials and by limited formal training of clinicians in evaluating published evidence. This article will provide strategies and techniques to evaluate critically the quality of published research, synthesize the findings, and integrate published evidence in the care of patients with ocular hypertension. Design Review of the published literature and consensus of a panel of experts. Methods The published literature on evidence-based medicine was reviewed. Strategies and techniques in evaluating the quality of evidence and how to integrate evidence into the practice setting using the following three major questions were discussed by a panel of experts: Are the results of the study valid? What are the results? Do the study outcomes apply to individual patient care? Results Approaches to assessing study validity and the importance of considering the size of the treatment effect and precision of the effect size were detailed. The importance of using the {"}number-needed-to-treat{"} as a tool for translating results of clinical trials to individual patient care and the {"}number-needed-to-harm{"} as a method of comparing the potential benefit and harm of a given therapy was acknowledged. Conclusion As the volume of high-quality data increases, the information provided herein may help ophthalmologists apply evidence-based medicine techniques as they seek to optimize the care of individual patients with ocular hypertension.",
author = "Coleman, {Anne L.} and Kuldev Singh and Richard Wilson and Cioffi, {George A.} and Friedman, {David S} and Weinreb, {Robert N.}",
year = "2004",
month = "9",
doi = "10.1016/j.ajo.2004.04.057",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "138",
journal = "American Journal of Ophthalmology",
issn = "0002-9394",
publisher = "Elsevier USA",
number = "3 SUPPL.",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Applying an evidence-based approach to the management of patients with ocular hypertension

T2 - Evaluating and synthesizing published evidence

AU - Coleman, Anne L.

AU - Singh, Kuldev

AU - Wilson, Richard

AU - Cioffi, George A.

AU - Friedman, David S

AU - Weinreb, Robert N.

PY - 2004/9

Y1 - 2004/9

N2 - Purpose The use of evidence-based medicine in managing patients with ocular hypertension has been constrained by the limited availability of high-quality data from controlled clinical trials and by limited formal training of clinicians in evaluating published evidence. This article will provide strategies and techniques to evaluate critically the quality of published research, synthesize the findings, and integrate published evidence in the care of patients with ocular hypertension. Design Review of the published literature and consensus of a panel of experts. Methods The published literature on evidence-based medicine was reviewed. Strategies and techniques in evaluating the quality of evidence and how to integrate evidence into the practice setting using the following three major questions were discussed by a panel of experts: Are the results of the study valid? What are the results? Do the study outcomes apply to individual patient care? Results Approaches to assessing study validity and the importance of considering the size of the treatment effect and precision of the effect size were detailed. The importance of using the "number-needed-to-treat" as a tool for translating results of clinical trials to individual patient care and the "number-needed-to-harm" as a method of comparing the potential benefit and harm of a given therapy was acknowledged. Conclusion As the volume of high-quality data increases, the information provided herein may help ophthalmologists apply evidence-based medicine techniques as they seek to optimize the care of individual patients with ocular hypertension.

AB - Purpose The use of evidence-based medicine in managing patients with ocular hypertension has been constrained by the limited availability of high-quality data from controlled clinical trials and by limited formal training of clinicians in evaluating published evidence. This article will provide strategies and techniques to evaluate critically the quality of published research, synthesize the findings, and integrate published evidence in the care of patients with ocular hypertension. Design Review of the published literature and consensus of a panel of experts. Methods The published literature on evidence-based medicine was reviewed. Strategies and techniques in evaluating the quality of evidence and how to integrate evidence into the practice setting using the following three major questions were discussed by a panel of experts: Are the results of the study valid? What are the results? Do the study outcomes apply to individual patient care? Results Approaches to assessing study validity and the importance of considering the size of the treatment effect and precision of the effect size were detailed. The importance of using the "number-needed-to-treat" as a tool for translating results of clinical trials to individual patient care and the "number-needed-to-harm" as a method of comparing the potential benefit and harm of a given therapy was acknowledged. Conclusion As the volume of high-quality data increases, the information provided herein may help ophthalmologists apply evidence-based medicine techniques as they seek to optimize the care of individual patients with ocular hypertension.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=4444364799&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=4444364799&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.ajo.2004.04.057

DO - 10.1016/j.ajo.2004.04.057

M3 - Article

C2 - 15364047

AN - SCOPUS:4444364799

VL - 138

JO - American Journal of Ophthalmology

JF - American Journal of Ophthalmology

SN - 0002-9394

IS - 3 SUPPL.

ER -