Dear Rod, Amy, Catherine and Jon,
I write from a GP perspective and have a rather bad impression of pharmaceutical research as again pointed out by Ben Goldacre here
http://retractionwatch.com/2015/12/04/did-a-clinical-trial-proceed-as-planned-new-project-finds-out/
and no "Big Data" will improve fabricated data http://www.labtimes.org/editorial/e_654.lasso
Therefore SR appear futile to me, to waste again time and money over these numbers. It's better to ask doctors what they think would be a good research topic then to swallow Big Pharma indoctrination.
My impression as a GP with patients is as follows: take for example
- "painkillers" but most need to actually address life events / stress (nothing to do with the analgesic)
- "antidepressants" again people's needs are to address personal and social circumstances (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dozpAshvtsA
- "antipyretics" health professionals instead need to educate parents how to support the child through feverish episodes
- COPD - help people stop smoking
- NIDDM - help people to have better life styles
- NCD non-communicable diseases such as asthma, eczema, hayfever, IBD, ADHD, ASD, etc - check whether vaccines have contributed to this (ISAAC has consistently ignored this) https://m.youtube.com/watch?list=PLiC5xPiBbjJXuX5xNvArmK9DbvnvVhD9B&v=SOLft-jJlKE&index=9
I would be interested to hear what Jon means with moving things on at Cochrane, for me it was good that Catherine alerted me that there are SR about life style interventions and also from Jon about a project to assign P, I, C, O elements to articles in Trip, including qualitative evidence, which might make it more relevant for me in the GP consultation room.
Paul Glasziou's research should become mainstream - doctor led research, rather than shareholder led. http://www.racgp.org.au/your-practice/guidelines/handi/
Maybe Paul Glaziou's suggestions for SR are helpful for your Jon for Trip, PICO project http://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1001419
BW
|