Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Clinical Trials01:16

Clinical Trials

Clinical trials are prospective experimental studies conducted on humans to determine the safety and efficacy of treatments, drugs, diet methods, and medical devices. Using statistics in clinical trials enables researchers to derive reasonable and accurate conclusions from the collected data, allowing them to make wise decisions in uncertain situations. In medical research, statistical methods are crucial for preventing errors and bias.
There are four phases in a clinical trial. A phase one...
The Scientific Method in Nursing Process01:18

The Scientific Method in Nursing Process

The scientific method provides the foundation for any research. It is the most reliable and objective of all forms of gaining knowledge and guides in applying research-based evidence in practice and conducting future research.
When using research findings to change practice, one must understand the process used to guide a study. The scientific method is a systematic, step-by-step process that supports the data's validity, reliability, and generalizability. As a result, findings can be safely...
Clinical Trials: Overview01:11

Clinical Trials: Overview

Clinical development focuses on how the drug will interact with the human body and encompasses four key phases of clinical trials, each serving a specific purpose in assessing the safety and effectiveness of new drugs. These phases overlap and build upon one another. Phase I involves a small group of healthy volunteers (typically 20-80 individuals) or, in cases where significant toxicity is expected, patients with the targeted disease, such as cancer or AIDS. The volunteers are tested for...
Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches01:23

Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches

Biopharmaceutical studies constitute a vital field aiming to enhance drug delivery methods and refine therapeutic approaches, drawing upon diverse interdisciplinary knowledge. In research methodologies, the choice between controlled and non-controlled studies significantly influences the study's reliability and accuracy.
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast, controlled...
Therapeutic Drug Monitoring: Affecting Factors01:29

Therapeutic Drug Monitoring: Affecting Factors

Therapeutic Drug Monitoring (TDM) is the clinical practice of measuring specific drug levels in a patient's blood or body tissues to manage and optimize therapy. TDM is crucial for drugs with narrow therapeutic windows, like warfarin and phenytoin, where incorrect doses can lead to treatment failure or severe side effects. This monitoring ensures the dosage administered is within a safe and effective range. The factors affecting therapeutic drug monitoring include:Patient-Specific Factors:a.
Hazard Ratio01:12

Hazard Ratio

The hazard ratio (HR) is a widely used measure in clinical trials to compare the risk of events, such as death or disease recurrence, between two groups over time. It reflects the ratio of hazard rates—the instantaneous risk of the event occurring—between a treatment group and a control group. This measure provides valuable insights into the relative effectiveness of a treatment by assessing how the risk of an event differs between the two groups.
For example, in a clinical trial evaluating a...

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Admissions and readmissions among patients with congestive heart failure: the impact of pandemic waves in New South Wales, Australia.

Public health research & practice·2025
Same author

Trajectories of hospital service use in the last 12 months of life by people with chronic kidney disease: a retrospective cohort study.

Australian health review : a publication of the Australian Hospital Association·2024
Same author

Association between self-reported pain experiences in hospital and ratings of care, readmission and emergency department visits: a population-based study from New South Wales, Australia.

Anaesthesia·2024
Same author

The association between patient self-reported experiences with medication discharge counselling and hospital readmissions: A cross-sectional analysis of a population-based survey.

Research in social & administrative pharmacy : RSAP·2024
Same author

The association between patient-reported experiences with hospital food services and recovery outcomes - A population survey of patients from 75 public hospitals.

Clinical nutrition ESPEN·2024
Same author

Factors affecting 12-month unplanned readmissions for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients: the effect of mental disorders in an Australian cohort.

Journal of public health (Oxford, England)·2024

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jun 24, 2026

The Participant-Reported Implementation Update and Score (PRIUS): A Novel Method for Capturing Implementation-Related Data Over Time
06:05

The Participant-Reported Implementation Update and Score (PRIUS): A Novel Method for Capturing Implementation-Related Data Over Time

Published on: February 19, 2021

Wait time benchmarks, research evidence and the knowledge translation process.

Diane E Watson1, Morris L Barer, Heidi M Matkovich

  • 1Health Council of Canada, Vancouver, BC.

Healthcare Policy = Politiques De Sante
|March 24, 2009
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Evidence-based benchmarks for medically acceptable wait times were developed through a partnership between health ministries and researchers. This collaboration demonstrated that research synthesis can quickly inform policy, even under pressure.

More Related Videos

A Novel Method for Involving Women of Color at High Risk for Preterm Birth in Research Priority Setting
14:43

A Novel Method for Involving Women of Color at High Risk for Preterm Birth in Research Priority Setting

Published on: January 12, 2018

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jun 24, 2026

The Participant-Reported Implementation Update and Score (PRIUS): A Novel Method for Capturing Implementation-Related Data Over Time
06:05

The Participant-Reported Implementation Update and Score (PRIUS): A Novel Method for Capturing Implementation-Related Data Over Time

Published on: February 19, 2021

A Novel Method for Involving Women of Color at High Risk for Preterm Birth in Research Priority Setting
14:43

A Novel Method for Involving Women of Color at High Risk for Preterm Birth in Research Priority Setting

Published on: January 12, 2018

Area of Science:

  • Health Services Research
  • Health Policy Development

Background:

  • The Provincial and Territorial Ministries of Health required evidence-based benchmarks for medically acceptable wait times.
  • A collaborative approach was initiated involving government ministries and the research community.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To inform the development of the first set of evidence-based benchmarks for medically acceptable wait times.
  • To assess the feasibility of rapid research synthesis in policy-making.

Main Methods:

  • A novel partnership was formed between Provincial and Territorial Ministries of Health, the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR), and Canada's health services research community.
  • CIHR implemented a rapid-response funding process to support eight Canadian research teams.
  • These teams synthesized existing evidence to inform benchmark development.

Main Results:

  • The first set of evidence-based benchmarks for medically acceptable wait times were developed and announced in December 2005.
  • The rapid-response funding and evidence synthesis process successfully met demanding timelines.
  • The study demonstrated the capacity for research to rapidly inform policy.

Conclusions:

  • Collaborative partnerships between policymakers and researchers can accelerate evidence-based decision-making.
  • Research synthesis is a viable tool for informing policy, even in high-pressure situations.
  • The developed benchmarks provide a foundation for evaluating and improving healthcare access.