Search

Your search keyword '"Watine, J."' showing total 220 results
Start Over Author "Watine, J." Publication Year Range Last 50 years
220 results on '"Watine, J."'

6. Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations in clinical practice guidelines Part 3 of 3. The GRADE approach to developing recommendations

Author

Brożek, J. L., Akl, E. A., Compalati, E., Kreis, J., Terracciano, L., Fiocchi, A., Ueffing, E., Andrews, J., Alonso-Coello, P., Meerpohl, J. J., Lang, D. M., Jaeschke, R., Williams, J. W., Jr, Phillips, B., Lethaby, A., Bossuyt, P., Glasziou, P., Helfand, M., Watine, J., Afilalo, M., Welch, V., Montedori, A., Abraha, I., Horvath, A. R., Bousquet, J., Guyatt, G. H., and Schünemann, H. J.

Published
2011
Full Text
View/download PDF

15. Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations in clinical practice guidelines part 3 of 3. The GRADE approach to developing recommendations

Author

Brożek, J, Akl, E, Compalati, E, Kreis, J, Terracciano, L, Fiocchi, A, Ueffing, E, Andrews, J, Alonso-Coello, P, Meerpohl, J, Lang, D, Jaeschke, R, Williams, J, Phillips, B, Lethaby, A, Bossuyt, P, Glasziou, P, Helfand, M, Watine, J, Afilalo, M, Welch, V, Montedori, A, Abraha, I, Horvath, A, and Bousquet, J

Abstract

This is the third and last article in the series about the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach to grading the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations in clinical practice guidelines and its application in the field of allergy. We describe the factors that influence the strength of recommendations about the use of diagnostic, preventive and therapeutic interventions: the balance of desirable and undesirable consequences, the quality of a body of evidence related to a decision, patients' values and preferences, and considerations of resource use. We provide examples from two recently developed guidelines in the field of allergy that applied the GRADE approach. The main advantages of this approach are the focus on patient important outcomes, explicit consideration of patients' values and preferences, the systematic approach to collecting the evidence, the clear separation of the concepts of quality of evidence and strength of recommendations, and transparent reporting of the decision process. The focus on transparency facilitates understanding and implementation and should empower patients, clinicians and other health care professionals to make informed choices.

Published
2016

26. Guides de pratique clinique: trions-les*

Author

Augereau, C., additional, Couaillac, J.-P., additional, De Mouy, D., additional, Dézier, J.-F., additional, Fonfrède, M., additional, Lepargneur, J.-P., additional, Szymanowicz, A., additional, and Watine, J., additional

Published
2009
Full Text
View/download PDF

27. Fondons nos recommandations de bonne pratique sur des preuves cliniques

Author

Watine, J., primary, Haemmerer, B., additional, Harlay, A., additional, Henry, M., additional, Quemeras, C., additional, Varrasse, M., additional, Zago, M.-L., additional, Meunier, L., additional, Gostomski, M., additional, Terra, E., additional, Maguer, D., additional, Blais, J., additional, Sachy, J., additional, Roda i Beltran, V., additional, and Monzee, B., additional

Published
2005
Full Text
View/download PDF

45. Laboratory variables and stratification of non resected, non small-cell lung cancer patients : recommendations for future trials.

Author

Watine, J., Friedberg, B., and Bouarioua, N.

Subjects
*LABORATORIES, *SMALL cell lung cancer, *LUNG cancer, *CLINICAL pathology, *BLOOD plasma
Abstract

Objective. – To identify, through a review of the literature, the laboratory variables that would allow a more accurate stratification of unresected non small-cell lung cancer patients who participate in clinical trials.Method. – Systematic review, without meta-analysis, following the recommendations of the International Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine, and taking into account the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials statement.Results. – Of 1106 publications retrieved, we were able to include only fourteen studies in our review. Available evidence would support the use of several laboratory variables as prognostic covariables to stratify non resected non small-cell lung cancer patients in clinical trials, but blood haemoglobin would be the only one that could be recommended on a routine basis, and only in patients treated with radiotherapy (three studies out of three). The possible consequences in terms of therapeutic decision of haemoglobin measurements remain however to be clarified.Conclusion. – Until better designed studies are published, a number of arguments would support the pre-treatment measurements of the following variables in patients participating in clinical trials : blood haemoglobin, white blood cell count with differential, serum LDH, albumin, calcium, and NSE. Further studies would also be necessary to support the addition to this list, of other tumour markers (including Cyfra 21-1), and/or measurements during or after treatment. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Published
2002
Full Text
View/download PDF

Catalog

Books, media, physical & digital resources
See catalog results