Introducing Gout Evidence and Sources

Introducing Gout Evidence and Sources is my draft for explanations of a new gout resources service.
Specifically I present my ideas for different grades of evidence for assessing quality of gout resources.
Also, I will explain how I describe sources of evidence for gout resources.

Introducing Gout Evidence and Sources Audience

I wrote Introducing Gout Evidence and Sources for active GoutPal Members who are interested in projects that I am working on. So, it is not a place to discuss personal gout issues. Therefore, please ask gout questions in the gout forum. Otherwise, you can contribute to improving GoutPal resources by adding your comments below.

Introducing Gout Evidence and Sources

You need to login to read this GoutPal work in progress. But, you can share your thoughts about gout evidence and sources by completing the survey below.
[mycred_show_if balance=”0.010″]
I am creating my long-awaited gout resource database. So, I want users to be able to compare and assess the quality of each resource. Therefore, it is vital to include the source of information for each resource. As there are many sources of evidence for efficacy of gout resources, I need to create a Source Hierarchy. Also, I must grade the evidence as an indicator of how reliable and relevant it might be.

Gout Resource Evidence Sources

Clinical
Clinical trials.
Academic
These are mainly Medical Journals. Including professional guidelines, where these are published in Journals.
Government
Official government recommendations.
Opinion
Common views, but not backed up with peer-reviewed research.
Producer
Manufacturers of products, and providers of gout services. Includes distributors and agents.

Because each resource will have discrete sources, this taxonomy will be a hierarchy. For example, there will be one Source called Academic. Then, individual journals will have their own record beneath Academic. For example, Am J Med will have it’s own record.

Gout Resource Evidence Grades

Gouty
Research on real gout sufferers is the best quality gout evidence. But,
be sure that the profile of gout sufferers tested is similar to you. In particular, look at the selection criteria for clinical gout trials. Or, consider the profiles of people in case studies.
Human
Research on humans is better than animals. But, assess with caution. For example, think about buying a wedding suit. Then, imagine you select the top selling suit from all suit sales. But, you’ll probably be disappointed. Because average tastes might not suit you. Also, you could end up with a boiler suit!
Statistics
Statistics give useful pointers to resources that might be useful to you. But, you need to follow that up by seeking better quality case studies and clinical trials.
Animal
Be very careful relying on evidence from animal studies. Because human metabolism is rarely the same as other animals.
Lab
Lab conditions can be tightly controlled to prove or disprove the investigators theories. But, in many cases, these theories might not apply to our bodies. Because, our bodies might have other factors that stop lab results working in the real world.
Outdated
This is similar quality to opinion. Because, parts of it might still be relevant. But you should best use it as a guide for further, more recent, research.In most cases, I will replace outdated resources with more recent ones. But, sometimes we have to wait for new research.
Opinion
Might be appropriate, but check out the source. Because you need to check for reliability. Also, as with all sources, you need to assess if the situation is relevant to you.
Obsolete
Based on science that has been shown to be wrong. Worst form of evidence, because it is misleading.

This will replace the information on http://www.goutpal.com/treating-gout/
[/mycred_show_if]

Help Methods photo

Tell me if Gout Evidence and Sources is useful to you.

Survey is temporarily unavailable. Please try later

1 thought on “Introducing Gout Evidence and Sources

  1. Keith Taylor Post author

    For Evidence Grades, I’ve also identified a ‘Mixed’ grade. This is mainly for reviews, where evidence from a wide range of investigations is considered. But, it’s early days for this grade of evidence. Because once the resource database is fully operational it might prove better to add multiple tags.

Comments are closed.