About Epistemonikos
What is Epistemonikos?
Epistemonikos is a collaborative, multilingual database of research evidence and knowledge translation products that are usually referred as "evidence", according to the meaning given in Evidence-Based Health Care.
It includes systematic reviews, overviews of reviews (including evidence-based policy briefs), primary studies included in systematic reviews and structured summaries of that evidence.
Epistemonikos was developed and is maintained by systematically searching PubMed and other databases for relevant systematic reviews and overviews of reviews. The search strategies that are used and the methods that are used to screen the search results and select records for inclusion are described here:
The aim of Epistemonikos is to provide rapid access to systematic reviews in health. A unique feature of Epistemonikos is that it links together systematic reviews, overviews of reviews and primary studies, thus providing a highly efficient method for searching. In addition, it includes translations of the titles and abstracts of included records to facilitate searching in different languages and it is continually updated by searching multiple sources of systematic reviews and overviews of reviews.
Epistemonikos is not a comprehensive database of health research. It only includes primary studies that have been included in a systematic review.
What does Epistemonikos mean?
The greek word epistemonikos was used by Aristotles, meaning "What is worth knowing". This word was later translated into latin as scientia. We have picked this name because of several reasons.
- The intention to separate "the wheat from the chaff" in Health research: We are not saying that the chaff is not important, but we do believe some information has more weight than other (there is a hierarchy of evidence).
- The pretension of emphasizing real and endurable scientific knowledge: Episteme is a root derived from the Greek word ἐπιστήμη for knowledge or science, from the verb ἐπίσταμαι, "to know". It is usually opposed to doxa (common belief or popular opinion). Is has also been contraposed to techne (craftsmanship, craft, or art) but we are not referring to this meaning (this is a rough simplification of a huge philosophical issue. Apologies to philosophers and knowledgeable people in general).
- The importance of using a universal language: Even though the English has become the lingua franca of health sciences, it is known that language is still a major barrier for many clinicians and policy-makers in the world. Our vision is to create a site where users don't see the difference between using English or their own language.
- Users build knowledge: Another translation of epistemonikos is "the one who generates knowledge". We firmly believe that everyone can be part of this process and will continuously intend to engage users in finding, creating, appraising or disseminating new knowledge. We want to emphasize that epistemonikos is a work in progress. What you are seeing is the beta version, with the basic functionalities and a restricted amount of information available. We will work hard in order to perfecting this version, incorporating more information and developing new functionalities. Feedback is most welcomed at contact@epistemonikos.org
How to use Epistemonikos
Epistemonikos can easily be searched by typing terms into the search box and clicking on the “Search Epistemonikos” button.
Articles will appear at the top based on an algorithm developed by Epistemonikos team. For instance, articles including all terms entered in the query will appear first, and those including some terms will appear later. As you move away from results at the top of the search results, you will find less pertinent articles.
Additional articles can also be found by opening the abstract for relevant articles that are found and then clicking on one of the boxes on the right ("the dolmen") showing evidence related to the article. This will show
- For overviews: any other overviews that include one or more of the systematic reviews included in the overview and all of the systematic reviews included in the overview
- For systematic reviews: any overviews that include the systematic review, any other systematic reviews that include one or more of the primary studies included in the systematic review, and all of the primary studies included in the systematic review
- For primary studies: all of the systematic reviews that include the study and all of the primary studies that are included in one or more of those systematic reviews
For more details and tips about searching see How it works
By clicking on “Advanced search” it is possible to restrict the search to specific fields (title, abstract, title and abstract, or author) and to use Boolean logic; i.e. choosing whether to search only for articles that include more than one term (using AND) or to search for articles that include any of two or more terms (using OR).
Who are we?
Epistemonikos was founded by Gabriel Rada and Daniel Pérez. Many institutions and individual people are involved in different aspects. The vast majority of them collaborate without an economic retribution.
The following people have contributed to the development of Epistemonikos:
- Gabriel Rada (Director), José Peña, Solange Rivera, Ignacio Neumann, Daniel Capurro, Mauricio Soto, Juan Carlos Claro, and other members of the Evidence-Based Medicine Unit, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile.
- Daniel Pérez (CTO Epistemonikos), Juan Vásquez, Felipe Valverde, Sebastián Valenzuela, Francisco Madrid, and other members of Epistemonikos development team.
- Andy Oxman, Sarah Rosenbaum, Global Health Unit, Norwegian Knowledge Centre for the Health Services.
- Vivian Welch, Jordi Pardo, Institute of Population Health, University of Ottawa.
- Many collaborators and translators, including coordinators by thematic area
The software development has been funded from multiple sources, such as internal funding from the Evidence-Based Health Care Program of the Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, and a grant from the Alliance for Health Policy and Systems Research (WHO). We also benefit of professional practice of students of software engineering from Universidad de Chile, and Biomedical informatics from DUOC UC. Some software has been commonly developed for PDQ-Evidence, a database to facilitate rapid access to the best available evidence for decisions about health systems, which is part of the SURE project (SURE-Supporting the Use of Research Evidence for Policy in African Health Systems- is a collaborative project that builds on and supports the Evidence-Informed Policy Network (EVIPNet) in Africa and the Regional East African Community Health (REACH) Policy Initiative. SURE is funded by the European Commission’s 7th Framework Programme (Grant agreement no 222881), and the Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation (Norad).
The screening of information, classification, addition of relations, collection of metatada and translations is made by multiple collaborators from many institutions in different countries. We receive support through the academic recognition of medical and dentistry students by the Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Universidad de Chile and Universidad de las Américas.
Epistemonikos.org is a collaborative nonprofit project. All of its content and features are available for free. See details in Terms and conditions
Criteria for considering studies for this database
Types of studies
We consider the following types of studies for inclusion:
- Systematic reviews (syntheses of primary studies)
- Overviews of systematic reviews (syntheses of systematic reviews and, sometimes, primary studies)
- Primary studies that are included in a systematic review or overview that is included in Epistemonikos
Revues Systématiques
We consider systematic reviews for inclusion if they fulfill the criteria below or are classified as a systematic review in an overview or structured summary.
Systematic review criteria (DARE. Accessed 04/08/2011, 2011, at http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/cms2web/AboutDare.asp)
>or =4 criteria (1-3 are mandatory)
- Were inclusion/exclusion criteria reported?
- Was the search adequate?
- Were the included studies synthesized?
- Was the validity of the included studies assessed?
- Are there sufficient details about the individual studies presented?
Additionally, the review has to:
- Provide a list of included studies
- Summarize included studies
Other terms used by authors to describe a systematic review include: meta-analysis, rapid review, evidence-based review, overview and literature review. We classify any review that meets the above criteria as a systematic review, regardless of the term employed by the authors.
Overviews of systematic reviews
We consider overviews for inclusion if they fulfill the first criterion and one of criteria 2 to 4:
- A search strategy is described
- Only systematic reviews are included
- It is stated (or it is implicit) that for a specific question adressed, the primary studies will not be looked for if there are systematic reviews.
- Systematic reviews are the main focus of the article, and primary studies used to supplement the results of the included reviews.
- Additionally, the overview must provide a list of included reviews and, if relevant, studies, and summarize included systematic reviews.
Other terms used by authors to describe overviews of systematic reviews include umbrella review, review of reviews, meta-reviews. We also consider evidence-based policy briefs (also called evidence briefs for policy) and guidelines, recommendations and consensus statements that meet the above criteria.
Études primaires
We include all studies included in systematic reviews and overviews that fulfill the following criteria:
- Address a health problem in individuals, populations or health systems.
- Original data are provided (instead of using data generated in other studies).
Primary studies are included even though the source of the study might not be one of the sources screened by Epistemonikos.
Types of questions
We include systematic reviews and overviews of systematic reviews that that address an explicit question about health, including Treatment, diagnosis, prognosis, harm, and etiology
We exclude systematic reviews and overviews of systematic reviews that address methodological questions.
Epistemonikos search strategies
Electronic searches
The following databases are searched (No language or publication status restriction is applied):
- Cochrane database of systematic reviews (CDSR)
- Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness (DARE)
- Health Technology Assessment Database
- PubMed
- LILACS
- SUPPORT Summaries
- EPPI-Centre Evidence Library
- 3ie Systematic Reviews and Policy Briefs
- WHO Database
- Campbell Library
- SURE policy briefs
- European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies
- DFID
- NICE public health guidelines and systematic reviews
- Guide to Community Preventive Services
- CADTH Rx for Change
- McMaster Plus KT+
- McMaster Health Forum
- Evidencias en Pediatría
All records in CDSR, DARE, HTA database, SUPPORT Summaries, EPPI-Centre Evidence Library, 3ie Systematic Reviews and Policy Briefs, Campbell Library, Evidencias en Pediatría, SURE policy briefs, DFID, NICE public health guidelines and systematic reviews, Guide to Community Preventive Services, CADTH Rx for Change, McMaster Plus KT+ and McMaster Health Forum are considered as potentially eligible. Considering the great amount of records in PubMed or LILACS, we use search strategies with emphasis in specificity (Appendix 1)
Epistemonikos methods
Selection of studies and data extraction
Primary studies included in Systematic reviews
All Primary studies included in systematic reviews that fulfill our inclusion criteria are entered into the database, independent of language or publication status.
If a list of included studies is not clearly provided by a systematic review or overview, we extract it from tables, annexes or from the text. If it is not possible to extract a list of included studies from the article (or there are doubts about this list, we contact the authors).
Glossary
Revues Systématiques
Systematic reviews are summaries of research evidence that address a clearly formulated question using systematic and explicit methods to
- identify, select, and critically appraise relevant research
- collect and analyse data from the studies that are included in the review
Systematic reviews of research evidence constitute a more appropriate source of research evidence for decision-making than the latest or most heavily publicized research study. Advantages of systematic reviews include
- Reduced risk of bias in selecting and interpreting the results of studies
- Reduced risk of being misled by the play of chance in identifying studies for inclusion, or the risk of focusing on a limited subset of relevant evidence
- Critical appraisal of the available research and placing individual studies or subgroups of studies in the context of all of the relevant evidence
- Allowing others to appraise critically the judgements made in selecting studies and the collection, analysis and interpretation of the results
Overviews of reviews
Overviews of reviews are summaries of systematic reviews that address broad questions using systematic methods to
- identify, select, and critically appraise relevant systematic reviews
- collect and analyse data from the systematic reviews that are included in the overview
Evidence-based policy briefs
Evidence-based policy briefs bring together ‘global’ research evidence (from systematic reviews) and local evidence to inform deliberations about health policies and programmes
Études primaires
Primary studies in Epistemonikos include all of the studies that met the inclusion criteria for the systematic reviews in Epistemonikos.
The only limitations for inclusion of primary studies in Epistemonikos are those that were established by the review authors. We have not excluded studies based on publication status, language of publication, year of publication or study design beyond whatever exclusion criteria were used by the review authors.
Résumés Structurés
Structured summaries of overviews, systematic reviews and primary studies are prepared using standard headings and include critical appraisal and interpretation of the evidence that is summarised.
Typically these are prepared by someone other than the authors of the reports that are summarised and they contain more information than what is normally found in the abstracts written by the authors, which are also included in Epistemonikos.
The structured summaries that are included were not prepared specifically for Epistemonikos and are only available when they have been prepared by the authors of a report (e.g. executive summaries of evidence-based policy briefs) or by others (e.g. SUPPORT Summaries of systematic reviews for policymakers or DARE abstracts of systematic reviews).
Dolmen
The dolmen (as you would have noticed, we love funny words), is a 5-categories diagram based in the principles of Evidence-Based Health Care where we believe everything people calls evidence can be classified. It is the conceptual framework of epistemonikos and allows many of the functionalities of Epistemonikos.
Don’t know what a dolmen is, go to Wikipedia. Want to see more dolmens, go to Pinterest
