medigraphic.com
ISSN 3061-8142 (Electronic)

2026, Number S1

<< Back

Rev Mex Anest 2026; 49 (S1)

Medical consensus: how to respond to a lack of scientific evidence?

Mancilla-Galindo J

Language: Spanish
References: 4
Page: 504-506
PDF size: 763.57 Kb.


Text Extraction

No abstract.


REFERENCES

  1. Howick J, Chalmers I, Glasziou P, Greenhalgh T, Heneghan C,Liberati A, et al.; OCEBM Levels of Evidence Working Group.The Oxford 2011 levels of evidence [Internet]. Oxford: Centre forEvidence-Based Medicine, University of Oxford; 2011. Availablein: https://www.cebm.ox.ac.uk/resources/levels-of-evidence/ocebmlevels-of-evidence

  2. Lillie EO, Patay B, Diamant J, Issell B, Topol EJ, Schork NJ. The n-of-1 clinical trial: the ultimate strategy for individualizing medicine? PerMed. 2011;8:161-173. doi: 10.2217/pme.11.7.

  3. Rosenfeld RM, Nnacheta LC, Corrigan MD. Clinical consensusstatement development manual. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg.2015;153:S1-S14. doi: 10.1177/0194599815601394.

  4. Arakawa N, Bader LR. Consensus development methods: Considerationsfor national and global frameworks and policy development. Res SocialAdm Pharm. 2022;18:2222-2229. doi: 10.1016/j.sapharm.2021.06.024.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com