Levels of Evidence

RN to BSN class video on Levels of Evidence in research literature.

[morenikeadesanya]

You are good at imparting knowledge into people's brain! Some people are good, but do not know how to impart the knowledge into others, trust me.
Thank you!

[physiotherapistpaulina]

This was very useful, and clear. Thank-you so much. I feel I have a much better grasp on this concept now.

[jovenkyna]

Thanks so much for this video! Now I'm confident to continue my assignment

[lorrainecoleman]

Thank you. Your video was very helpful!!
I will be looking out for more from you!

[BertaJeannot]

Thank you! Well spoken and very clear explanation.

[AA-sxxu]

it worth listening. Awesome job on clearly explaining the topic!

[houmamkitet]

Thanks you very much for this clear and easy to understand review

[bobmirror]

Well said. Logic keeping so called logic opinion in check.

[bhuwinderbains]

If I get secondary resources. Author of resources has used quantitative studies for systematic review of given clinical problem. What level of evidence it would be?
TIA

[rinavickery]

Thank so much this is very informative

[dunningkruger]

I'm curious how data collected based on memory from an environment filled with confounding variables can be considered reliable. That would mean that all forms of evidence in the pyramid aside from randomized control trial data and calculations and systemic reviews and meta study of randomized control trials contain reliable data and calculations. Also at the base of that pyramid, expert opinion, is considered the least reliable. Aren't all conclusions expert opinion on the data collected? Also isn't the pyramid itself an expert opinion thereby making the pyramid the least reliable form of evidence supporting the pyramid itself? Also how do you draw causative conclusions from associative data? Correlation is not causation. That being the case you can't conclude anything clinical from the epidemiological studies in the pyramid. That being the case, the only reliable sources of evidence would be randomized control trials and systemic reviews and meta analysis of randomized control trials. Am I misunderstanding something?

[bluesquirrel]

Thank you for this video. Maybe fix your audio, it's quite low

[monsieurayala]

04:16 Quantitative research is "purely objective". Why on earth do people keep (erroneously) repeating that? If a scientist said that in my lab, they would be immediately blacklisted for such an abomination.

[desirte]

No entendí un qlo y capaz saco 0 gracias