Hans Lund1, Carsten B Juhl2, Birgitte Nørgaard3, Eva Draborg3, Marius Henriksen4, Jane Andreasen5, Robin Christensen6, Mona Nasser7, Donna Ciliska8, Mike Clarke9, Peter Tugwell10, Janet Martin11, Caroline Blaine12, Klara Brunnhuber13, Karen A Robinson14. 1. Section for Evidence-based Practice, Western Norway University of Applied Sciences, Bergen, Norway. Electronic address: Hans.lund@hvl.no. 2. Department of Sport Science and Clinical Biomechanics, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark; Department of Physiotherapy and Occupational Therapy, University Hospital of Copenhagen, Herlev & Gentofte, Denmark. 3. Department of Public Health, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark. 4. The Parker Institute, Bispebjerg and Frederiksberg Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark. 5. Department of Health, Science and Technology, Public Health and Epidemiology Group, Aalborg University, Alborg, Denmark; Department of Physical and Occupational Therapy, Aalborg University Hospital, Aalborg, Denmark. 6. Musculoskeletal Statistics Unit, The Parker Institute, Bispebjerg and Frederiksberg Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark; Department of Clinical Research, Research Unit of Rheumatology, University of Southern Denmark, Odense University Hospital, Denmark. 7. Peninsula Dental School, Plymouth University, Plymouth, England, UK. 8. Section for Evidence-based Practice, Western Norway University of Applied Sciences, Bergen, Norway; School of Nursing, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada. 9. Northern Ireland Methodology Hub, Queen's University Belfast, Northern Ireland. 10. Department of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada. 11. MEDICI Centre, Schulich School of Medicine & Dentistry, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada; Departments of Anesthesia & Biostatistics and Epidemiology & Biostatistics, Western University, London, Canada. 12. BMJ Knowledge Centre, London, UK. 13. Digital Content Services, Data Platform Operations, Elsevier, London UK. 14. Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: There is considerable actual and potential waste in research. The aim of this article is to describe how using an evidence-based research approach before conducting a study helps to ensure that the new study truly adds value. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Evidence-based research is the use of prior research in a systematic and transparent way to inform a new study so that it is answering questions that matter in a valid, efficient, and accessible manner. In this second article of the evidence-based research series, we describe how to apply an evidence-based research approach before starting a new study. RESULTS: Before a new study is performed, researchers need to provide a solid justification for it using the available scientific knowledge as well as the perspectives of end users. The key method for both is to conduct a systematic review of earlier relevant studies. CONCLUSION: Describing the ideal process illuminates the challenges and opportunities offered through the suggested evidence-based research approach. A systematic and transparent approach is needed to provide justification for and to optimally design a relevant and necessary new study.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: There is considerable actual and potential waste in research. The aim of this article is to describe how using an evidence-based research approach before conducting a study helps to ensure that the new study truly adds value. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Evidence-based research is the use of prior research in a systematic and transparent way to inform a new study so that it is answering questions that matter in a valid, efficient, and accessible manner. In this second article of the evidence-based research series, we describe how to apply an evidence-based research approach before starting a new study. RESULTS: Before a new study is performed, researchers need to provide a solid justification for it using the available scientific knowledge as well as the perspectives of end users. The key method for both is to conduct a systematic review of earlier relevant studies. CONCLUSION: Describing the ideal process illuminates the challenges and opportunities offered through the suggested evidence-based research approach. A systematic and transparent approach is needed to provide justification for and to optimally design a relevant and necessary new study.