Parim Evidencia Ltd
Medical communications and Market access consultancy
Medical communications, Payers education, Patients education, Evidence synthesis, Literature Reviews, HEOR, HTA, Market access, Education and training materials, Surveys, Semi-structured interviews, Focus groups
18/11/2023
The COM-B Model for Behavior Change
Three key factors capable of changing behaviour (B): Capability (C), opportunity (O), and motivation (M). [The Decision Lab]
03/08/2022
Value stories for payers, HCPs and patients
Contact us to create a compelling value proposition to support your product launch
05/06/2022
02/06/2022
Qualitative Research and social change
31/10/2021
Value Demonstration Tools
“Knowing is not enough; we must apply.
Willing is not enough; we must do.”
Knowing what works in health care is of the highest importance
for patients, healthcare providers, and other decision-makers. The most reliable way to identify benefits and harms associated with
various treatment options is a systematic review of comparative
effectiveness research.
The team at Parim Evidencia has more than 40 years of combined experience in providing systematic reviews and evidence synthesis services for healthcare and pharmaceutical clients.
Message for more info
21/08/2021
Systematic Review Decision Tree
22/09/2020
The ‘‘Hierarchy of evidence’’
A guide to determining the most appropriate study designs for answering questions about the effectiveness
19/08/2020
Statistical analysis
z-test
t-test
F- statistics
Chi-square
ANOVA
Regression
and
other statistical tests
We ensure that the correct statistical significance test is applied to test your hypothesis.
15/08/2020
Scoping reviews or Systematic reviews
There are several major differences between a scoping review and a traditional systematic review with a meta-analysis.
Both meta-analyses and scoping reviews begin
with a primary question on which inquiry is focused. However, a scoping review allows for a more general question and exploration of the related literature, rather than focusing on providing answers to a more limited question
(Moher et al., 2015).
For a systematic review, investigators generally start with a clearly defined question and explore and analyze high-level research studies focused on narrow parameters. Conversely, a scoping review has less depth but a broader conceptual range (Arksey & O’Malley, 2005).
A scoping review is considered at a higher level than
a straightforward review of the literature.
A scoping review is an appropriate alternative to a systematic review when literature is vast and complex (Arksey & O’Malley, 2005; Grimshaw, 2008).
13/08/2020
Consider your research question.
Is it focused and well-defined?
Farrugia's FINER framework for refining research questions
10/08/2020
Literature Searching
Journals that publish systematic reviews most frequently require searches of:
* MEDLINE
* EMBASE
* The Cochrane Library's Central Registry of Controlled Trials
and Database of Systematic Reviews
Other databases (PsycINFO, CINAHL, etc.) may be important depending on your topic.
08/08/2020
Medical Writing
The medical writing accredits the information entering the public domain by ensuring accuracy and highlighting the most relevant studies for all stakeholders, from pharmaceutical clients to patients.
08/08/2020
Five Steps to a Systematic Review
1. Formulate your question.
2. Search for studies.
3. Assess the quality of studies.
4. Summarise the evidence.
5. Interpret the findings.
05/08/2020
Scientific writing must be structured, objective and demonstrate critical thinking. However, it must also be:
clear and concise
analytical and precise
objective, cautious and logical
03/08/2020
Systematic Literature Reviews assessing:
Interventions (efficacy and safety)
Epidemiological reviews
Public health