Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences

Module Information
Good morning
HEP4217  - Reviewing Evidence for Health Promotion Practice

Period 2: from 30-10-2023 to 22-12-2023
Co-requisites:
None
Coordinator: Ruijter, D. de
ECTS credits: 6
Language of instruction: English

Publication dates timetable/results in the Student Portal

Deadline publication timetable
The date on which the timetable of this module is available: 13-10-2023

Deadline publication final result
The date on which the final grade of this module is available: 23-1-2024


Resit booking

Exam booking for a test in current academic year (resit)
You will be booked automatically for the resit in one of our resit periods. You may check our calenders to find out which modules can be retaken and when: https://intranet.maastrichtuniversity.nl/nl/fhml-studenten/studieverloop/wanneer-wat
As of one week before the resit test takes place, you can check in Student Portal if you are booked correctly: Student Portal > My Courses > More actions. The test will also be visible in your time table.

Exam booking for a test from a previous academic year (exam only)
All students who have not passed the test for this module in a previous academic year, will be booked automatically for the test during the regular block period. You will be enrolled in the new course in Canvas but not scheduled for a tutorial group and other educational activities. If you do not wish to participate in this test at the end of the regular block period please de-register via askFHML.

Though great care has been taken to assure the accuracy of the information on fhmlweb, the FHML cannot be held responsible for possible printing errors, incomplete information, or misinterpretations. Additionally, the FHML reserves the right to make changes to this information.


Course information

Description: EN:
When you make evidence-based decisions, the best thing you can do is to use the results of multiple studies that have investigated the same topic. Combining results of multiple studies can be done by means of systematic reviews of the literature. In this course you learn how to conduct a systematic review. Evidence-based working is important in the field of health promotion. Evidence-based health promotion means using the best available evidence for making decisions about health promotion activities. For example, when you work as a health promoter, you should make decisions about determinants that need to be targeted in an intervention to modify a specific behavior for a specific target audience. Or you should make decisions about interventions or intervention components that can be effective in modifying a specific behavior. During this course you will be introduced to, and gain experience in, the process of a systematic review on a self-selected topic. A systematic review provides a detailed overview of evidence regarding current knowledge in a certain area of research, based on a specific research question. It does so by collating all empirical evidence that fits pre-specified eligibility criteria to answer the specific research question. It uses explicit, systematic methods that are selected to minimize bias, thus providing reliable findings from which conclusions can be drawn and decisions made. The aim of this course is for you to formulate such a research question and to find, select, read and evaluate scientific literature critically. You will also learn how to acquire skills in reporting on the results of this process in an advisory report and in providing and receiving peer feedback. The final end product will be the writing of an advisory report and the developing of an infographic based on your systematic review, following the standard steps described in literature.
Goals: EN:
This module has several general goals. First, students will get knowledge and skills regarding the formulation of a sound research question and finding, selecting, reading and evaluating literature critically. Second, students will learn how to appraise scientific literature and how to use it in writing an advisory report and in developing an infographic for practice. Third, students will get skills in providing and receiving peer feedback
Key words: EN:
Systematic review, Effectiveness of interventions, Observational studies, translation to practice
Literature: Higgins JPT, Thomas J, Chandler J, Cumpston M, Li T, Page MJ, Welch VA (editors). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions version 6.2 (updated February 2021). Cochrane, 2021. Available from www.training.cochrane.org/handbook.

Liberati, A., Altman, D.G., Tetzlaff, J., Mulrow, C., Gøtzsche, P.C., Ioannidis, J.P.A., Clarke, M.,Devereaux, P.J., Kleijnen, J., Moher, D. (2009). The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration. British Medical Journal, 39, b2700.

Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D.G., for the PRISMA Group (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRIsMa statement. British Medical Journal, 339, b2535 doi: 10.1136/bmj.b2535.

Page, M.J., McKenzie, J.E., Bossuyt, P.M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T.C., Mulrow, C.D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J.M., Akl, E.A., et. al. for the PRISMA group (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. British Medical Journal, 372 (71)

Zaza, S., Wright-De Agu ̈ero, L.K., Briss, P.A.,Truman, B.I. Hopkins, D.P., Hennessy, M.H., Sosin, D.M., Anderson, L. Carande-Kulis, V.G., S.M. Teutsch, Pappaioanou, M. (2000). Data Collection Instrument and Procedure for Systematic Reviews in the Guide to Community Preventive Services. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 18, 1S, 44–74.

Egger, M., Smith, G. D., Altman, D. G. (2001). Systematic reviews in Health Care. Meta-analysis in context. BMJ books.

Higgins JPT, Altman DG, Götzsche PC, et al. The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. Bmj 2011; 343

Heddle NM. The research question. Transfusion 2007; 47:15-17

Stroup DF, Berlin JA, Morton SC, et al. Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: a proposal for reporting. Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) group. Jama 2000; 283:2008-2012 

Leppink J, O'Sullivan P, Winston K. Effect size - large, medium and small. Perspect Med Educ 2016; 5: 346-349

Cohen J. The earth is round (p<.05). American Psychologist 1994
Teaching methods:
  • Assignment(s)
  • Lecture(s)
  • Paper(s)
  • Presentation(s)
  • Research
  • Skills
  • Training(s)
Assessments methods:
  • Assignment
  • Attendance
  • Final paper
  • Participaion
  • Presentation

This page was last modified on:5-4-2024
No rights can be derived from data in this information system.       © 2024 J. van Emmerik