Cochrane Pakistan: A Gigantic Leap Forward for Research in Pakistan
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.51253/pafmj.v76i2.14500Abstract
Pakistan, though a country with maximized potential in terms of young has enormous capacity to evolve and prevail for managing us an exponential technological growth and economy. However, the scarcity in systematic methods to prevail education and most importantly in the field of high-end education. Methodologically generated “Quality evidence” throughout globe defines a direct correlation between education with income generation, country’s productivity and quality technology incorporation.1 Defining education as the “Linchpin of success” we must acknowledge towards the foundation pivot for proliferating evolutionary education for humanity to be the next to superlative application of research”. The science of “Human Medicology” is exclusively leaning upon quality evidence for applying clinical decision making for patients. While the science of medicine on earthly souls’ dates back to prehistory, perseverant transformative efforts by our ancestors allowed us to this day where the tagging “methodology” to research for quality output to evidence can allow today’s human growth from convention to accelerated AI era.2 “Cochrane” was one great healthcare research giant leap which revolutionized the use of “Medical evidence” in clinical care pathways. “Archibald Cochrane” the stamped as the father of “Cocrane Collaboration” with renaming in 1993 by “Liam Chalmers” labeling simply as “Cochrane further adding to next-general superbness to evidence synthesis with summation of utilitarian IT tools.3
Downloads
References
1. Almas A, Awan S, Bloomfield G, Nisar MI, Siddiqi S, Ahmed A, et al. Opportunities and challenges to non-communicable disease (NCD) research and training in Pakistan: a qualitative study from Pakistan. BMJ Open 2022; 12(12): e066460.
http://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2022-066460
2. Khan SH. AI at Doorstep: ChatGPT and Academia. J Coll Physicians Surg Pak 2023; 33(10): 1085-1086.
https://doi.org/10.29271/jcpsp.2023.10.1085
3. Starr M, Chalmers I, Clarke M, Oxman AD. The origins, evolution, and future of The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2009; 25 Suppl 1 :182-95.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S026646230909062X
4. Ansari S, Poncela J, Otero P, Ansari A, Mahfooz O. Research in Pakistan: structure, funding and results. Pak J Eng Technol Sci 2016; 5(1):.
https://doi.org/10.22555/pjets.v5i1.327
5. Fazal A. Ethical Issues in Conducting Cross-Cultural Research in Low-Income Countries: A Pakistani Perspective. Asian Bioeth Rev. 2021; 14(2): 151-168. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41649-021-00196-w
6. Frandsen TF, Bruun Nielsen MF, Lindhardt CL, Eriksen MB. Using the full PICO model as a search tool for systematic reviews resulted in lower recall for some PICO elements. J Clin Epidemiol 2020; 127: 69-75.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.07.005
7. Page M, Sterne JAC, Higgins JPT. Assessing risk of bias due to missing results in a synthesis. In Higgins JPT, Thomas J, Chandler J, Cumpston
M, Li T, Page MJ, et al., editors, Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. 2nd ed. Chichester UK: Wiley-Blackwell. 2019, p. 349-374. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119536604.ch13
8. Henderson LK, Craig JC, Willis NS, Tovey D, Webster AC. How to write a Cochrane systematic review. Nephrology 2010; 15(6): 617-24.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1440-1797.2010.01380.x
9. Sargeant JM, O'Connor AM. Scoping Reviews, Systematic Reviews, and Meta-Analysis: Applications in Veterinary Medicine. Front Vet Sci 2020; 7:11.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.





