2023 - Research.com Medicine in Norway Leader Award
2022 - Research.com Medicine in Norway Leader Award
His primary scientific interests are in MEDLINE, Evidence-based medicine, Health care, Randomized controlled trial and Family medicine. His research in MEDLINE intersects with topics in Psychological intervention, Quality, Research design, Medical education and Alternative medicine. His study in Psychological intervention is interdisciplinary in nature, drawing from both Meta-Analysis as Topic and Systematic review.
He has researched Evidence-based medicine in several fields, including Quality of evidence, Grade system, Public relations, Health policy and Grading. His work carried out in the field of Randomized controlled trial brings together such families of science as Observational study, Statistics, Clinical trial, Relative risk and Publication bias. His work deals with themes such as Health services research, Interquartile range and CINAHL, which intersect with Family medicine.
His scientific interests lie mostly in Health care, MEDLINE, Nursing, Health policy and Systematic review. His work in Health care covers topics such as Psychological intervention which are related to areas like Family medicine and Randomized controlled trial. His study looks at the intersection of MEDLINE and topics like Alternative medicine with Peer review.
His Nursing research is multidisciplinary, incorporating perspectives in Program evaluation and Process management. His Health policy study deals with Health services research intersecting with Health administration and Social policy. His study explores the link between Evidence-based medicine and topics such as Grading that cross with problems in Quality assurance.
The scientist’s investigation covers issues in Health care, Evidence-based medicine, Medical education, Psychological intervention and Public health. His biological study spans a wide range of topics, including Knowledge management, Critical thinking, Actuarial science and MEDLINE. Andrew D Oxman combines subjects such as Cost–benefit analysis and Cost sharing with his study of MEDLINE.
The various areas that Andrew D Oxman examines in his Evidence-based medicine study include Systematic review, Certainty, Resource, Health literacy and Process management. His Medical education research integrates issues from Developing country, Information and Communications Technology, Focus group and Critical appraisal. His research in Psychological intervention tackles topics such as Intervention which are related to areas like Peer review, Clinical trial, Randomized controlled trial and Family medicine.
His main research concerns Health care, Evidence-based medicine, Systematic review, Psychological intervention and MEDLINE. His Health care study incorporates themes from Actuarial science and Resource. The subject of his Evidence-based medicine research is within the realm of Alternative medicine.
His research integrates issues of Intervention, Needs assessment, Organizational culture and Operations research in his study of Systematic review. His Psychological intervention study which covers Randomized controlled trial that intersects with Physical medicine and rehabilitation and Impact evaluation. His research in MEDLINE is mostly focused on Cochrane Library.
This overview was generated by a machine learning system which analysed the scientist’s body of work. If you have any feedback, you can contact us here.
The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials
Julian P T Higgins;Douglas G Altman;Peter C Gøtzsche;Peter Jüni.
GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations
Gordon H Guyatt;Andrew David Oxman;Gunn Elisabeth Vist;Regina Kunz.
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement
D Moher;A Liberati;J Tetzlaff;D G Altman.
GRADE guidelines: 1. Introduction-GRADE evidence profiles and summary of findings tables
Gordon Guyatt;Andrew D Oxman;Elie A Akl;Regina Kunz.
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology (2011)
Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations.
David Atkins;Dana Best;Peter A Briss;Martin Eccles.
GRADE guidelines: 3. Rating the quality of evidence
Howard Balshem;Mark Helfand;Mark Helfand;Holger J. Schünemann;Andrew D. Oxman.
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology (2011)
Audit and feedback: effects on professional practice and healthcare outcomes
Noah Ivers;Gro Jamtvedt;Signe Flottorp;Jane M Young.
Changing Physician Performance: A Systematic Review of the Effect of Continuing Medical Education Strategies
DA Davis;MA Thomson;AD Oxman;RB Haynes.
Evidence-Based Medicine: A New Approach to Teaching the Practice of Medicine
Gordon Guyatt;John Cairns;David Churchill;Deborah Cook.
What is “quality of evidence” and why is it important to clinicians?
Gordon H Guyatt;Andrew D Oxman;Regina Kunz;Gunn E Vist.
If you think any of the details on this page are incorrect, let us know.
We appreciate your kind effort to assist us to improve this page, it would be helpful providing us with as much detail as possible in the text box below: