Analysis, Synthesis and Management of Health Knowledge (HRB4102)
RESPONSIBLE PROFESSORS:
Luiz Fernando Manzoni Lourençone 
CREDITS: 6
COURSE LOAD:
| Theoretical (per week) |
Practical (per week) |
Studies (per week) |
Duration | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2h | 5h | 2h | 10 weeks | 90h |
CLASS TYPE: Hybrid
Additional class type information: Percentage of the course that will take place in hybrid system – 10% in-person and 90% on-line
OBJECTIVES:
At the end of the discipline, students must be able to:
• Know the synthesis process of evidence conception in health care;
• Describe the process of evidence synthesis;
• Transcribe evidence transference (knowledge);
• Analyze how evidence is being used
BACKGROUND:
During the time of exponentially knowledge growth and of evidence-based medicine, it is necessary to define search strategies and analysis that supports the best decisions in health care.
In this context, this discipline is intended to present search strategies and systematization of evidence in an organized manner, according to what is recommended by o intended organs, and give opportunity to a practical exercise of search and systematization of evidence to the participants.
CONTENTS:
• Evidence-Based Practice: origin, concepts and stages
• Integrative review
• Scoping Review
• Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE)
• Review of evidence from The Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI)
• Strategy for finding evidence
• Use of checklists: Preferred Reportingn Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyzes (PRISMA), and PRISMA extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR)
BIBLIOGRAPHY:
ARKSEY, H.; O’MALLEY, L. Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. International
Journal of Social Research Methodology, v.8, n.1, p.19-32, 2005.
AUDI, R. (1995) – The cambridge dictionary of philosophy. Cambrid e : Cambrid e University Press.
CARANDE-KULIS, V. g. [et al.] (2000) – Methods for systematic reviews of economic evaluations for
the guide to Community Preventive Services. American Journal of
BRASIL. Ministério da Saúde. Diretrizes metodológicas. Sistema GRADE–manual de graduação da
qualidade da evidência e força de recomendação para tomada de decisão em saúde. Brasília:
Ministério da Saúde, 2014.
DAWES, M. [et al.] (2005) – Sicily statement on evidencebased practice. BMC Medical Education. Vol.
5, nº 1, p. 1-7.
DOBROW, M. J. ; gOEL, V. ; UPSHUR, R. E. g. (2004) – Evidence-based health policy: context and
utilisation. Social Science & Medicine. Vol. 58, nº 1, p. 207-217.
GLASER, B.; STRAUSS, A. (1967) – The discovery of grounded theory: strategies for qualitative
research. New York : Aldine. GRIMSHAW, J. M. [et al.] (2001)
GRIMSHAW, J. M. [et al.] (2004) – Effectiveness and efociency of Guideline dissemination and
implementation strategies. Health Technology Assessment. Vol. 8, nº 6, p.1-72.
HIGGINS, J.P.T.; THOMAS, J. (editors). Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions.
2nd ed. Glasgow: Cochrane, Wiley Blackwell, 2019.694p.
HULLEY, S.B.; CUMMINGS, S.R.; BROWNER, W.S.; GRADY, D.G.; NEWMAN, T.B. Delineando a
pesquisa clínica. 4 ed. Porto Alegre: Artmed, 2015. 386 p.