ArticleJournal of alternative and complementary medicine (New York, N.Y.)2017
Scientific Evaluation and Review of Claims in Health Care (SEaRCH): A Streamlined, Systematic, Phased Approach for Determining "What Works" in Healthcare.
Article in Journal of alternative and complementary medicine (New York, N.Y.), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Establishing fidelity for the creating opportunities for personal empowerment: Symptom and technology management resources (COPE-STAR) intervention.Journal of advanced nursing · 2020Article
- Evaluating Integrative Cancer Clinics With the Claim Assessment Profile: An Example With the InspireHealth Clinic.Integrative cancer therapies · 2018Article
- Scientific evaluation and review of claims in health care (SEaRCH): a streamlined, systematic, phased approach for determining ''What Works'' in healthcare.British dental journal · 2017Article
- Claim Assessment Profile: A Method for Capturing Healthcare Evidence in the Scientific Evaluation and Review of Claims in Health Care (SEaRCH).Journal of alternative and complementary medicine (New York, N.Y.) · 2017Article
- SEaRCH™ expert panel process: streamlining the link between evidence and practice.BMC research notes · 2016Article
- Rapid Evidence Assessment of the Literature (REAL(©)): streamlining the systematic review process and creating utility for evidence-based health care.BMC research notes · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAnswering the question of "what works" in healthcare can be complex and requires the careful design and sequential application of systematic methodologies. Over the last decade, the Samueli Institute has, along with multiple partners, developed a streamlined, systematic, phased approach to this process called the Scientific Evaluation and Review of Claims in Health Care (SEaRCH™). The SEaRCH process provides an approach for rigorously, efficiently, and transparently making evidence-based decisions about healthcare claims in research and practice with minimal bias.
methodsSEaRCH uses three methods combined in a coordinated fashion to help determine what works in healthcare. The first, the Claims Assessment Profile (CAP), seeks to clarify the healthcare claim and question, and its ability to be evaluated in the context of its delivery. The second method, the Rapid Evidence Assessment of the Literature (REAL DISCUSSION: SEaRCH is a systematic, rigorous approach for evaluating healthcare claims of therapies, practices, programs, or products in an efficient and stepwise fashion. It provides an iterative, protocol-driven process that is customized to the intervention, consumer, and context. Multiple communities, including those involved in health service and policy, can benefit from this organized framework, assuring that evidence-based principles determine which healthcare practices with the greatest promise are used for improving the public's health and wellness.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.