KINE 2P41 Lecture Notes - Lecture 4: Grey Literature, Health Promotion, Systematic Review

26 views5 pages

For unlimited access to Class Notes, a Class+ subscription is required.

January, 26, 2016
KINE 2P41
Information and Evidence: Types and Problems
Types of evidence
-Primary, secondary, tertiary, grey literature
Primary Source: Criteria
-published studies
-written by people who actually did the research
-referred journals (peer reviewed)
-a panel of scientific experts review the paper, edit the paper and determine if it is of a
high enough standard to be published
Peer review: all the steps
-have an idea
-write a proposal to sell and share the idea
-proposal review by 3-10 experts at a funding agency- only best get money (can take up to 6
months)
-present results at conferences- open to 100s of peers
-publish in a peer reviewed journal
-what is peer review?
-3 experts, plus an editor reviews before publishing (sometimes a year), then is open to
criticism of the world
-in university settings, primary source referred journal articles always trump other sources
Secondary Sources
-written by someone who did not do the research originally but still peer reviewed
-usually found in:
-review articles, editorials
-the Warburton ‘systematic review’ of physical activity guidelines is an example
-you read everyone else’s work on the particular subject you are looking at
-compare and contrast findings on each paper
-tougher than it looks
-analyze statistically
Tertiary Sources
-text books, books
-usually an editor who reads things over, makes sure things are accurate
-often a couple of academics who read textbooks, but are not checking every fact
-really not a lot of review going into it
Popular Press Sources
find more resources at oneclass.com
find more resources at oneclass.com
Unlock document

This preview shows pages 1-2 of the document.
Unlock all 5 pages and 3 million more documents.

Already have an account? Log in
-time, newsweek, CNN ect.
-no peer review, no real editing, expect to make the story more dynamic (often at the expense
of accuracy)
-even if they have written about a research study or interviews the scientist who conducted the
study- it is not a scientific source of information
Websites, blogs ect.
-not even reviewed by an editor or fact checkers as a newspaper would be
Grey Literature
-many high quality studies funded by government agencies that are not peer reviewed
-ministry of health, health Canada ect.
-not peer reviewed, although may have gone through peer reviewed proposal process
-may have been done by the best scientists in the world
When writing an essay
-use primary sources as often as possible
-secondary sources (eg. Reviews) from peer reviewed journals are fine- very informative
-restrict yourself in the use of tertiary sources, such as books- tends to be outdated information
Summary: choosing evidence to promote
-bias in evidence
-randomized control trial (RCT)
-problems with RCTs
Bias in sport
Bias in research
-Bias-preferential or prejudiced treatment of one group over another
Hierarchy of evidence in health promotion
-since 1980s, told that the best evidence is from RCTs
-to ignore all other studies
-see table one in Grossmen reading- 3 major evidence hierarchies put RCTs at top
Evidence Hierarchy (level 1 best, 5 worst)
find more resources at oneclass.com
find more resources at oneclass.com
Unlock document

This preview shows pages 1-2 of the document.
Unlock all 5 pages and 3 million more documents.

Already have an account? Log in

Get access

Grade+
$10 USD/m
Billed $120 USD annually
Homework Help
Class Notes
Textbook Notes
40 Verified Answers
Study Guides
1 Booster Class
Class+
$8 USD/m
Billed $96 USD annually
Homework Help
Class Notes
Textbook Notes
30 Verified Answers
Study Guides
1 Booster Class