Supplementary Files
Keywords
Research Report
Right to Health
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17566/ciads.v6i4.410How to Cite
Abstract
Objective: to demonstrate how to formulate questions in the field of lawsuits in health care sector and how to seek evidence from the scientific literature to better instruct processes. Methods: review of articles referring to the field of systematization of scientific research for decision making and characterization of existing question options and relevant databases. Results: There are four methods for elaborating a structured question containing information on Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcomes, with the acronyms PICO, SPIDER, SPICE, ECLIPSE the most used. The formulation of the question more that adequately subsidizes the search in the different types of bases of the literature. These bases may be of synthesis studies and systematic reviews; bases of the general literature; specific scientific technical production bases; databases considered gray literature and bases of guides and clinical guidelines. Conclusion: the use of scientific evidence has become increasingly necessary for lawsuits in health care sector requiring the practice of asking questions to seek answers in the scientific literature to instruct judicial processes in the field of health.References
ALBERANI, V.; DE CASTRO PIETRANGELI, P.; MAZZA, A. M. The use of grey literature in health sciences: a preliminary survey. Bulletin of the Medical Library Association, v. 78, n. 4, p. 358–63, 1990.
ASTI, V. A. No Title Metodologia da Pesquisa Cientifica. 5 edição ed. Porto Alegre: Globo, 1979.
BARTOLOMEI, C. E. F. et al. Medicina e direito : atuação na integralidade destes dois saberes. Diagn Tratamento, v. 15, n. 1, p. 39–42, 2010.
BJÖRK, B.; ROOS, A.; LAURI, M. Global annual volume of peer reviewed scholarly articles and the share available via different Open Access options. ELPUB2008, 2008.
BOOTH, A. Formulating answerable questions. Evidence Based Practice: An Information Professional’s, 2004.
BOOTH, A. Clear and present questions: formulating questions for evidence based practice. Library hi tech, 2006.
COOKE, A.; SMITH, D.; BOOTH, A. Beyond PICO. Qualitative Health Research, v. 22, n. 10, p. 1435–1443, 2012.
DIAS, E. R.; SILVA JUNIOR, G. B. DA. Evidence-Based Medicine in judicial decisions concerning right to healthcare. Einstein (São Paulo), v. 14, n. 1, p. 1–5, 2016.
GALVÃO, T.; PANSANI, T. Principais itens para relatar Revisões sistemáticas e Meta-análises: A recomendação PRISMA. Epidemiologia e Serviços, 2015.
LARSEN, P. O.; VON INS, M. The rate of growth in scientific publication and the decline in coverage provided by science citation index. Scientometrics, v. 84, n. 3, p. 575–603, 2010.
NOGUEIRA, K.; CAMARGO, E. Judicialização da saúde: gastos Federais para o Sistema Único de Saúde (SUS) entre 2011-2014. CADERNOS IBERO-, 2017.
QASEEM, A. et al. Annals of Internal Medicine Clinical Guideline Guidelines International Network : Toward International Standards for Clinical Practice Guidelines. Annals of Internal Medicine, v. 156, p. 525–531, 2012.
SANTOS, C. M. D. C.; PIMENTA, C. A. D. M.; NOBRE, M. R. C. A estratégia PICO para a construção da pergunta de pesquisa e busca de evidências. Rev Latino-am Enfermagem, v. 15, n. 3, p. 2–5, 2007.
SILVA, V. et al. Overview de revisões sistemáticas? um novo tipo de estudo. Parte II. Diagn., 2014.
WARE, M.; MABE, M. The STM report: An overview of scientific and scholarly journal publishing. 2015.
WILDRIDGE, V.; BELL, L. How CLIP became ECLIPSE: a mnemonic to assist in searching for health policy/management information. Health Information & Libraries Journal, 2002.
Authors retain the copyright to their works and grant the Cadernos Ibero-Americanos de Direito Sanitário (CIADS) the right of first publication.
All published articles are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). This license permits use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided that the original authorship and the source of publication are properly cited.