EBVMA Podcast

Narrated by the author, Dr. Gary Block, this is the article that appeared in the Journal of Veterinary Internal Medicine.

This is a reading of the open access article availabe in the Journal of the American Animal Hospital Association by EBVMA Board Member, Dr. Joann Lindenmayer.

Putting what we discussed in the past six episodes together, the EBVMA has designed the QUIT tool, an accessible starting point for critical appraisal of interventional research. All levels of practice should be able to apply this tool to an article they are examining to evaluate whether it is "worth their time" and impact practice.

As veterinary professionals, we strive to rely on scientific studies to guide our decision-making process when it comes to the care of our animal patients. Translating research findings into clinical practice is a crucial step in ensuring that scientific advancements make a real impact on the well-being of animals. It's not enough to have groundbreaking research sitting on the shelves; we need to bridge the gap between research and everyday veterinary medicine. Check out our website and if you haven't already, join the EBVMA!

In order to address anxiety about trusting a truth claim, the person making the claim must provide sufficient information for veterinarians to be assured that study outcomes were measured or collected in a way that ensures equal and fair assessment of all the animals in all the treatment groups. Every outcome for every animal must be evaluated in exactly the same way by a person who is completely unaware of which animals received a different treatment or had a different risk factor from any other animal in the study.

See more at the EBVMA website Podcast Series and be sure to join the EBVMA and get access to fabulous content like VetLexicon and VetMed Resource.

This is the 4th episode of our Evidence Anxiety Series and will discuss the importance of allocation in study design.  Infograph and transcript are available at ebvma.org. Narrated by Laura M Rey.

As a rule of thumb, if the researchers expect the treatment effect to be small, then the study has to be big, conversely, the smaller the study, the more likely it is that a small or rare effect is missed2. This relationship is the same regardless of the treatment applied, be it a surgical method, a behavior modification strategy, a drug, or a vaccine. Put even more simply, big studies have more power to det­­­ect differences.

1.  Jones SR, Carley S, Harrison M. An introduction to power and sample size estimation. Emerg Med J. 2003;20(5):453-458. doi:10.1136/emj.20.5.453

2.  Wilson Van Voorhis CR, Morgan BL. Understanding Power and Rules of Thumb for Determining Sample Sizes. Tutor Quant Methods Psychol. 2007;3(2):43-50. doi:10.20982/tqmp.03.2.p043

3.  Feinberg WE. Teaching the Type I and Type II Errors : The Judicial Process. Am Stat. 1971;25(3):30-32.

This is the second podcast in the questioning authority series.  In this podcast, we look at the importance of comparison to evaluate claims made about the efficacy of any procedure or intervention.  Infograph and transcript are available at ebvma.org. Narration by Dr. Sheila Keay.

An overview of how practitioners can question any claim made in media, conferences, sales representatives and, essentially, any medical wisdom.  Infograph is available at ebvm.org.  Narration by Dr. Bob Larson.

The process of developing a clinical question is divided into four categories:

1. Patient

2. Intervention

3. Comparison

4. Outcome

The practice of evidence-based veterinary medicine (EBVM) starts with forming a clinicalquestions. Forming a question that is highly specific, particularly in outcomes is very importantin retrieving relevant research.

Originally recorded October 2016 via Skype at Bel-Rea Institute of Animal Technology