To the Editor: Scott and Glasziou’s recent article about the challenges of integrating best research evidence into practice had excellent examples of the 20%–30% of treatments that remain widely used despite being shown to be ineffective or harmful.1 We also note the National Health and Medical Research Council initiative in creating a Research Translation Faculty to improve research relevance and its uptake into practice.
The full article is accessible to AMA members and paid subscribers. Login to read more or purchase a subscription now.
Please note: institutional and Research4Life access to the MJA is now provided through Wiley Online Library.
- 1. Scott IA, Glasziou PP. Improving effectiveness of clinical medicine: the need for better translation of science into practice. Med J Aust 2012; 197: 374-378. <MJA full text>
- 2. Webster J, Osborne S, Rickard CM, Hall J. Clinically indicated replacement versus routine replacement of peripheral venous catheters. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010; (3): CD007798.
- 3. Rickard CM, Webster J, Wallis MC, et al. Routine versus clinically indicated replacement of peripheral intravenous catheters: a randomised controlled equivalence trial. Lancet 2012; 380: 1066-1074.
No relevant disclosures.