A primer on current evidence-based review systems and their implications for behavioral medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Multiple review systems have been established within medicine and psychology to evaluate and disseminate research findings to clinical practice. PURPOSE: Within this article, five evidence-based review systems are reviewed to inform the development or the use of an evidence review system for the behavioral medicine field. METHODS: Each review system is described on several dimensions: history of the review system, the review process, and details about translation/sustainability efforts. RESULTS: Various factors from each system have been identified that would benefit a behavioral medicine evidence review system, such as a discussion of clinical features that influence the generalizability of review findings (i.e., the American Psychiatric Association) and the use of pre-review protocols (i.e., the Cochrane Collaboration). CONCLUSIONS: Although each review system has limitations, it is important for behavioral medicine to join one system because (a) systematic reviews are the only feasible means to evaluate and judge the usefulness of our interventions, and (b) reviews can inform policy, and, with effort, influence patient well-being. This group of behavioral medicine experts recommends that the Cochrane Collaboration review behavioral medicine interventions.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 31 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.