El enfoque de la Medicina Basada en la Evidencia en la regulación de prácticas de investigación en salud.

1 - Bonfill X, Rafael G,Cabello J. La medicina basada en la evidencia. Rev Esp Cardiol. [Internet] 1997 [citado 2019 Sep 24]; 50(12): 819-825. Disponible en: https://www.revespcardiol.org/es-la-medicina-basada-evidencia-articuloX0300893297005540?redirect=true

2 - Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. Evidence-based medicine. A new approach to teaching the practice of medicine. JAMA. 1992 Nov 4;268(17):2420-5.

3 - Sackett, D; Straus SE; Rosenberg, W; Haynes, RB. Medicina basada en la evidencia. Cómo practicar y enseñar la MBE. Madrid: Harcourt; 2001.

4 - Bonfill X, Rafael G,Cabello J. Op. cit. pág.822

5 - Brito G, González A, Cruz P. Origen, evolución y reflexiones sobre la medicina basada en la evidencia. Rev Cub Cir. [Internet]; 2010 [citado 2019 Sep 24]; 49(2). Disponible en: http://scielo.sld.cu/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0034-74932010000200014&lng=es

6 - Santos C, Pimienta C, Nobre MR. Estrategia PICO para la construcción de la pregunta de investigación y la búsqueda de evidencias. Rev Latino-Amer Enfer. [Internet] 2007[citado 25 Sep 2019]; 15(3), 508-511. Disponible en:http://www.scielo.br/pdf/rlae/v15n3/es_v15n3a23.pdf

7 - Hackshaw AK, Paul EA, Davenport ES. Evidence-based dentistry: what it is and how to practise it. En: Evidence-based dentistry: an introduction. Oxford: Backwell Munksgaard; 2006.

8 - CENETEC. Manual para la elaboración de protocolos de búsqueda para el desarrollo de guías de práctica clínica. [Internet] México: Secretaría de Salud; 2009. [citado 27 Sep 2019]. Disponible en: http://www.cenetec.salud.gob.mx/descargas/gpc/manual_protocolo_act.pdf

9 - Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care [Internet] History. Lugar: The Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health; c2019. [citado 27 Sep 2019]. Disponible en: http://canadiantaskforce.ca/about-us/history/

10 - Sackett, D; Straus SE; Rosenberg, W; Haynes, RB. Op. cit.

11 - Straus SE, Sackett DL. Getting research findings into practice. Using research finding in clinical practice. Br Med J. [Internet] 1998 [citado 25 Sep 2019];317:339-42. Disponible en: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1113635/

12 - Bonfill X, Rafael G,Cabello J. Op. cit. pág.820.13 - Navarrete L, Pérez C. Revistas biomédicas: desarrollo y evolución. Rev Méd Clín Las Condes, [Internet] 2019; [citado 2019 Sep 24]; 30(3):220.Disponible en: http://eprints.rclis.org/38679/

14 - Simera I, Moher D, Hoey J, Schulz KF, Altman DG. A catalogue of reporting guidelines for health research. Eur J Clin Invest. 2010 Jan;40(1):35-53.

15 - McIntosh LD, Hudson C, Juehne A, Haynes L, Mothershead S, Sumner J. Making science better: reproducibility, falsifiability and the scientific method. Figshare report 2019.[Internet] London : Digital science; 2019. Pág. 2 [citado 30 Sep 2019] Disponible en: https://digitalscience.figshare.com/ndownloader/files/17566139

16 - Sackett, D; Straus SE; Rosenberg, W; Haynes, RB. Op. cit, pág.26

17 - Centro Cochrane Iberoamericano. Manual Cochrane de revisiones sistemáticas de Intervenciones. [Internet] Traducción de: Higgins JPT, Green S (editors). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0. The Cochrane Collaboration. 2011. pág. 12. [citado 20 Sept 2019]; Disponible en: https://es.cochrane.org/sites/es.cochrane.org/files/public/uploads/Manual_Cochrane_510_reduit.pdf

18 - Centro Cochrane Iberoamericano. Op cit., pág.427

19 - Manterola C, Zavando D, GRUPO MINCIR. Cómo interpretar los “Niveles de Evidencia” en los diferentes escenarios clínicos. Rev. Chil Cir. [Internet] 2009[citado 30 Sep 2019]; 61(6): 582-595. Disponible en: http://www.scielo.cl/pdf/rchcir/v61n6/art17.pdf

20 - Gugiu PC, Ristei M. A Critical appraisal guidelines for grading levels of evidence. Eval Health Prof. 2010;33(3) 233-255. Disponible en: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20801972

21 - Guyatt G, Oxman AD, Kunz R, Gunn EV Yngye FY, Schunemann HJ. What is ‘quality of evidence’ and why is it important to clinicians? BMJ.[Internet] 2008 [citado 30 Sep 2019]; 336. Disponible en: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2364804/pdf/bmj-336-7651-analysis-0995.pdf

22 - Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Vist GE, Kunz R, Falck-Ytter Y, Alonso-Coello P, Schünemann HJ; GRADE Working Group. GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ. [Internet] 2008 Apr 26 [citado 20 Sept 2019];336(7650):924-6. Disponible en: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/pmid/18436948/

23 - Neumann I, Pantoja T, Peñaloza B, Cifuentes L, Rada G. El sistema GRADE: un cambio en la forma de evaluar la calidad de la evidencia y la fuerza de recomendaciones. Rev. méd. Chile [Internet]. 2014[citado 30 Sep 2019];142(.5):, p. 631. Disponible en: http://www.scielo.cl/scielo.php?pid=S0034-98872014000500012&script=sci_arttext

24 - Grupo de trabajo sobre GPC. Elaboración de Guías de Práctica Clínica en el Sistema Nacional de Salud. Manual Metodológico. Madrid: Plan Nacional para el SNS del MSC. Instituto Aragonés de Ciencias de la Salud-I+CS; 2007. Guías de Práctica Clínica en el SNS: I+CS Nº 2006/0I. [Internet] Pág.53 [citado 18 Oct 2019] Disponible en: http://www.madrid.org/bvirtual/BVCM017418.pdf

25 - CENETEC. Op. cit. pág.7

26 - Centro Cochrane Iberoamericano.Op cit pág. 116

27 - Lefebvre C, Glanville J, Briscoe S,Littlewood A, Marshall C, Metzendorf M, Noel-Storr A, Rader T,Shokraneh F, Thomas J, Wieland LS; on behalf of the Cochrane Information RetrievalMethods Group. Chapter 4: Searching for and selecting studies En: Cochrane Handbook for

Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Version 6, 2019. [Internet] [citado 18 Oct 2019] Disponible en: https://training.cochrane.org/handbook/current/chapter-04

28 - Institute of Medicine (U.S.) Committee on Standards for Systematic Reviews of Comparative Effectiveness Research., Eden J. Finding what works in health care : standards for systematic reviews. [Internet] Washington: National Academies Press; 2011. [citado 15 Oct 2019] Disponible en: http://www.nationalacademies.org/hmd/~/media/Files/Report%20Files/2011/Finding-WhatWorks-in-Health-Care-Standards-for-SystematicReviews/Standards%20for%20Systematic%20Review%202010%20Insert.pdf

29 - Metzendorf MI, Featherstone RM. Ensuring quality as the basis of evidence synthesis: leveraging information specialists' knowledge, skills, and expertise. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2018, Issue 9. Art. No.: ED000125. [Internet] [citado 15 Oct 2019] Disponible en: https://www.cochranelibrary.com/es/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.ED000125/full?highlightAbstract=

30 - Rethlefsen M, Ayala AP, Kirtley S, Koffel J, Waffenschmidt S. PRISMA-S. PRISMA Search Reporting Extension 2019. [Internet] [citado 27 Sep 2019] Disponible en: https://osf.io/ygn9w/

31 - Literature Search Standards Working Group. Mediated searching: a code of practice, May 2018. [Internet] [ditado 27 Sep 2019] Disponible en: http://standardsworkinggroup.blogspot.com/2018/05/mediated-searching-code-of-practicemay.html

32 - McGowan J, Sampson M, Salzwedel DM, Cogo E, Foerster V, Lefebvre C. PRESS Peer Review of Electronic Search Strategies: 2015 guideline statement. J ClinEpidemiol. [Internet] 2016 Jul [citado 27 Sep 2019];75:40-6. Disponible en: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0895435616000585

33 - Thomas B, Tachble A, Peiris D, Malhi R, Godlovitch G, Lin Y. Making literature reviews more ethical: a researcher and health sciences librarian collaborative process. Future Sci. OA. [Internet] 2015 [citado 26 Sep 2019];1(4),: 1-5. Disponible en: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5138015/

34 – Philippi JC, Likis FE, Tilden EL. Authorship grids: Practical tools to facilitate collaboration and ethical publication. Future Sci. OA. Res Nurs Health.2018;41:195–208.

35 - Nagendrababu V, Pulikkotil SJ, Sultan OS, Jayaraman J, Peters OA. Methodological and reporting quality of systematic reviews and meta-analyses in endodontics. J Endod. 2018 Jun;44(6):903-913.

36 - Dechartres A, Trinquart L, Atal I, Moher D, Dickersin K, Boutron I, Perrodeau E, Altman DG, Ravaud P. Evolution of poor reporting and inadequate methods over time in 20 920 randomised controlled trials included in Cochrane reviews: research on research study. BMJ[Internet] 2017 Jun 8 [citado 15 Oct 2019];357:j2490. Disponible en: https://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:cb0f8466-a761-4bd4-9172-9b5f6c6276b8/download_file?file_format=pdf&safe_filename=Dechartes%2Bet%2Bal%2B2017%2BBMJ%2B-%2BEvolution%2Bof%2Bpoor%2Breporting%2B-%2BAAM.pdf&type_of_work=Journal+article

37 - Rethlefsen ML, Farrell AM, OsterhausTrzasko LC, Brigham TJ. Librarian co-authors correlated with higher quality reported search strategies in general internal medicine systematic reviews. Disponible en: J Clin Epidemiol. 2015 Jun;68(6):617-26.38 - O'Brien BC, Harris IB, Beckman TJ, Reed DA, Cook DA. Standards for reporting qualitative research: a synthesis of recommendations. Acad Med. 2014 Sep;89(9):1245-51.

39 - Giacomini MK. The rocky road: qualitative research as evidence. ACP J Club. 2001 JanFeb;134(1):A11-3.

40 - Cochrane Iberoamérica. CERQual: Un nuevo planteamiento para apoyar el uso de pruebas cualitativas en la toma de decisiones. [Internet]. Barcelona: Centro Cochrane Iberoamericano, Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant Pau; c2019. [citado 04 Oct 2019] Disponible en: https://es.cochrane.org/es/news/cerqual-un-nuevo-planteamiento-para-apoyar-el-uso-depruebas-cualitativas-en-la-toma-de-decisio

41 - The EQUATOR Network [Internet]. Oxford: Equator network; c2019. [citado 25 Sep 2019]. Disponible en: http://www.equator-network.org/

42 – Mulrow CD, Oxman AD (eds). Cochrane Collaboration Handbook [updated September 1997]. In: The Cochrane Library [database on disk and CDROM]. The Cochrane Collaboration. Oxford: Update Software; 1994, issue 4. Citada en: Manual de la Colaboración Cochrane (versión española de “The Cochrane Collaboration Handbook”) [Internet] [actualización de Septiembre 1997]. Sabadell: Centro Cochrane Español; 1998. [citado 18 Oct 2019]Disponible en: http://www.eulate.net/forandalus/documentos/ManualRevisiones.pdf

43 - Simera I, Moher D, Hoey J, Schulz KF, Altman DG. Op.cit.

44 - Stroup DF, Berlin JA, Morton SC, Olkin I, Williamson GD, Rennie D, Moher D, Becker BJ, Sipe TA, Thacker SB. Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: a proposal for reporting. Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) group. JAMA. 2000 Apr 19;283(15):2008-12.

45 - Shea BJ, Grimshaw JM, Wells GA, Boers M, Andersson N, Hamel C, Porter AC, Tugwell P, Moher D, Bouter LM. Development of AMSTAR: a measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol. [Internet] 2007 Feb 15 [citado 11 Oct 2019];7:10. Disponible en: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1810543/

46 - Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Vist GE, Kunz R, Falck-Ytter Y, Alonso-Coello P, Schünemann HJ; GRADE Working Group. GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ [Internet] 2008 Apr 26[citado 11 Oct 2019] ;336(7650):924-6. Disponible en: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2335261/

47 - Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG; PRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoSMed. [Internet] 2009 Jul 21[citado 11 Oct 2019];6(7):e1000097. Disponible en: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2707599/

48 - Brouwers MC, Kho ME, Browman GP, Burgers JS, Cluzeau F, Feder G, Fervers B, Graham ID, Grimshaw J, Hanna SE, Littlejohns P, Makarski J, Zitzelsberger L; AGREE Next Steps Consortium. AGREE II: advancing guideline development, reporting and evaluation in health care. CMAJ.[Internet] 2010 Dec 14 [citado 11 Oct 2019];182(18):E839-42. Disponible en: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3001530/.

49 - Institute of Medicine (U.S.) Committee on Standards for Systematic Reviews of Comparative Effectiveness Research., Eden J. Finding what works in health care : standards for systematic reviews.[Internet] Washington: National Academies Press; 2011. [citado 18 Oct 2019] Disponible en: http://www.nationalacademies.org/hmd/~/media/Files/Report%20Files/2011/Finding-WhatWorks-in-Health-Care-Standards-for-SystematicReviews/Standards%20for%20Systematic%20Review%202010%20Insert.pdf

50 - Sackett DL. Rules of evidence and clinical recommendations on the use of antithrombotic agents. Chest. 1986 Feb;89(2 uppl):2S-3S.51 - Guyatt G, Oxman AD, Akl EA, Kunz R, Vist G, Brozek J, Norris S, Falck-Ytter Y, Glasziou P, DeBeer H, Jaeschke R, Rind D, Meerpohl J, Dahm P, Schünemann HJ. GRADE guidelines: 1. Introduction-GRADE evidence profiles and summary of findings tables. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011 Apr;64(4):383-94.

52 - The EQUATOR Network. All past events. [Internet]. Oxford: Equator network; c2019. [citado 04 Oct 2019] Disponible en: http://www.equator-network.org/category/events/all-pastevents/

53 - Simera I, Moher D, Hoey J, Schulz KF, Altman DG. Op cit.

54 - Simera I, Moher D, Hirst A, Hoey J, Schulz KF, Altman DG. Transparent and accurate reporting increases reliability, utility, and impact of your research: reporting guidelines and the EQUATOR Network. BMC Med. [Internet] 2010 Apr 26 [citado 11 Oct 2019] ;8:24. Disponible en: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2874506/

55 - Moher D, Cook DJ, Eastwood S, Olkin I, Rennie D, Stroup DF. Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement. Quality of Reporting of Meta-analyses. Lancet. 1999; 354(9193), 1896-900.

56 - The EQUATOR Network. History. [Internet]. Oxford: Equator network; c2019. [citado 04 Oct 2019] Disponible en: http://www.equator-network.org/about-us/history/

57 - Johansen M, Thomsen SF. Guidelines for reporting medical research: a critical appraisal. Int Sch Res Notices. [Internet] 2016 Mar 22[citado 18 Oct 2019];2016:1346026. Disponible en: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4897386/

58 - The EQUATOR Network. Pautas elaboradas por grupos editoriales. [Internet]. Oxford: Equatornetwork; c2019. [citado 04 Oct 2019] Disponible en: http://www.equatornetwork.org/library/spanish-resources-recursos-en-espanol/pautas-elaboradas-por-gruposeditoriales/

59 - Hanneke R. The hidden benefits of helping students with systematic reviews. J Med Libr Assoc. [Internet] 2018 Apr [citado 18 Oct 2019];106(2):244-247.Disponible en: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5886507/pdf/jmla-106-244.pdf

60 - Nicholson J, McCrillis A, Williams JD. Collaboration challenges in systematic reviews: a survey of health sciences librarians. J Med Libr Assoc. [Internet] 2017 Oct[citado 18 Oct 2019];105(4):385-393. Disponible en: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5624428/

61 - Cochrane.org. Acerca de nosotros. [Internet]. London: Cochrane; c2019. [citado 04 Oct 2019] Disponible en: https://www.cochrane.org/es/about-us

62- The EQUATOR Network. Selecting How to develop a reporting guideline. [Internet]. Oxford: Equator network; c2019. [citado 11 Oct 2019]. Disponible en: http://www.equatornetwork.org/toolkits/developing-a-reporting-guideline/

63 – Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG; PRISMA Group.Op cit., pág.4