Navegando por Palavras-chave "Estudos de intervenção"

Agora exibindo 1 - 3 de 3
  • Imagem de Miniatura
    Item
    Acesso aberto (Open Access)
    Gerenciamento de doenças utilizando séries temporais com o modelo ARIMA
    (Instituto Israelita de Ensino e Pesquisa Albert Einstein, 2013-03-01) Sato, Renato Cesar [UNIFESP]; Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)
    The evaluation of infectious and noninfectious disease management can be done through the use of a time series analysis. In this study, we expect to measure the results and prevent intervention effects on the disease. Clinical studies have benefited from the use of these techniques, particularly for the wide applicability of the ARIMA model. This study briefly presents the process of using the ARIMA model. This analytical tool offers a great contribution for researchers and healthcare managers in the evaluation of healthcare interventions in specific populations.
  • Imagem de Miniatura
    Item
    Acesso aberto (Open Access)
    Intervenções breves para problemas relacionados ao álcool
    (Associação Brasileira de Psiquiatria - ABP, 2004-05-01) Marques, Ana Cecília Petta Roselli [UNIFESP]; Furtado, Erikson Felipe; Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP); Universidade de São Paulo (USP)
    This article presents the concepts and basic premises that are necessary for a better understanding of the Brief Interventions (BIs), with a literature review of its effectiveness and a discussion about BIs in Brazil. The theoretical premises are discussed, as well the concepts represented by the acronym FRAMES: Feedback; Responsibility; Advice; Menu; Empathic and Self-efficacy. Results of systematic reviews and metanalysis about BIs effectiveness are discussed and a summary box with the main studies is presented. Finally, the recent developments about the introduction of BIs in Brazil are commented. The importance of health professionals training and the adoption of BIs within different settings are emphasized considering its demonstrated effectiveness and economic feasibility.
  • Imagem de Miniatura
    Item
    Acesso aberto (Open Access)
    Mapping of the evidence from systematic reviews of the Cochrane Collaboration for decision-making within physiotherapy
    (Associação Paulista de Medicina - APM, 2013-03-01) Versiani, Ane Helena Valle [UNIFESP]; Martimbianco, Ana Luiza Cabrera [UNIFESP]; Peccin, Maria Stella [UNIFESP]; Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)
    CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVE Evidence-based clinical practice emerged with the aim of guiding clinical issues in order to reduce the degree of uncertainty in decision-making. The Cochrane Collaboration has been developing systematic reviews on randomized controlled trials as high-quality intervention study subjects. Today, physiotherapy methods are widely required in treatments within many fields of healthcare. Therefore, it is extremely important to map out the situation regarding scientific evidence within physiotherapy. The aim of this study was to identify systematic reviews on physiotherapeutic interventions and investigate the scientific evidence and recommendations regarding whether further studies would be needed. TYPE OF STUDY AND SETTING Cross-sectional study conducted within the postgraduate program on Internal Medicine and Therapeutics and at the Brazilian Cochrane Center. METHODS Systematic reviews presenting physiotherapeutic interventions as the main investigation, in the Cochrane Reviews Group, edition 2/2009, were identified and classified. RESULTS Out of the 3,826 reviews, 207 (5.41%) that fulfilled the inclusion criteria were selected. Only 0.5% of the reviews concluded that the intervention presented a positive effect and that further studies were not recommended; 45.9% found that there seemed to be a positive effect but recommended further research; and 46.9% found that the evidence was insufficient for clinical practice and suggested that further research should be conducted. CONCLUSION Only one systematic review (“Pulmonary rehabilitation for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease”) indicated that the intervention tested could be used with certainty that it would be effective. Most of the systematic reviews recommended further studies with greater rigor of methodological quality.