Publications by authors named "B Djulbegovic"
Article Synopsis
- The study critiques the GRADE system for evaluating the certainty of scientific evidence, highlighting its inability to accurately assess treatment effects compared to a simpler linear tallying method.
- Researchers explored the relationship between odds ratios from meta-analyses before and after updates, finding that stable estimates suggest higher certainty when CoE is high.
- Results showed a clear linear drop in the likelihood of obtaining 'true' treatment effect estimates as CoE ratings decrease, indicating that more robust evidence correlates with higher quality ratings.
Background: Based on the Khorana score, guidelines recommend anticoagulation for primary prophylaxis (PP) in outpatients with cancer with an intermediate-to-high risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). ONKOTEV score has been prospectively externally validated as novel risk assessment model (RAM) with good discriminatory performances but no direct comparisons with Khorana Score are available.
Methods: Using the ONKOTEV validation dataset (n = 425), we applied generalized decision curve analysis (gDCA) which integrates the principles of evidence-based medicine with treatment effects, model accuracy and patient preferences (weighted as the relative value [RV] of avoiding VTE versus major bleeding [MB]).
Article Synopsis
- Consensus statements are important in medicine and public health, but not all use solid evidence to support their claims.
- Some statements rely on expert panels, which can be biased if many members share the same opinions or interests, especially without a thorough review of evidence.
- A recent case about COVID-19 showed that many panel members had strong connections to groups pushing for strict COVID measures without revealing these biases, highlighting the need for clear conflicts of interest to ensure trustworthiness.