Transcript Teleconference ke 4

Teleconference 4
Program Pra Doktor
5 Maret 2015
Jam 11:00 -13:00
Pokok Bahasan Teleconference 3 & 4
• Senin 2/3: Melacak makalah penelitian
empirik (PE) pasca SR.
• Kamis 5/3: Critical Appraisal (CA) makalah PE.
Makalah PE yang akan direview
Makalah2 PE yg
telah direview
Masalah &
Tujuan Penelitian
Awal
?
Makalah2 PE yg
akan direview
Masalah &
Tujuan Penelitian
Diperbarui
Masalah Penelitian mempertanyakan hubungan
intervensi-hasil yg lemah atau tidak valid pd
penelitian2 sebelumnya
Penyebab
Pemecahan
a. Kerangka konsep yg
tidak valid
b. rancangan
penelitian yg lemah
c. pelaksanaan
penelitian yg tidak
sesuai rencana.
a. Meningkatkan
validitas Kerangka
Konsep
b. Meningkatkan
kekuatan rancangan
c. Meningkatkan
kesaksamaan
pelaksanaan.
• Tanggal terbit terakhir makalah yg direview SR?
 lacak makalah2 PE dgn masalah penelitian
sama yg terbit sejak tanggal tsb sampai sekarang
 Review lebih lanjut (Jenis Review?)
• Kegunaan:
a. mengetahui sampai di mana perkembangan
pemecahan masalah penelitian  Masalah
& Tujuan Penelitian diperbarui.
b. Menyusun Bab II proposal  Mencari
masukan utk memecahkan masalah
penelitian.
Jenis Review Makalah PE  Mutu Kegunaan
Reviews of increasing complexity from narrative to systematic reviews...
Sumber: http://hlwiki.slais.ubc.ca/index.php/Scoping_reviews
Contoh
• Topik: DOTS
• Kata Kunci: DOTS
• Makalah SR: Volmink, J., & Garner, P. (2007).
Directly observed therapy for treating
tuberculosis. The Cochrane Library.
• Batas akhir review: 13 AUG 2007.
• Kesimpulan: DOT tidak menunjukkan ketaatan
berobat dan kesembuhan yg lebih lebih baik
dibandingkan pengobatan anti TB tanpa
pengawasan.
• Bagaimana Review lebih lanjut dikerjakan?
BioMed Central: adherence-to-treatment AND
tuberculosis  56 items
• Treatment adherence among sputum smearpositive pulmonary tuberculosis patients in
mountainous areas in China Song Yao, WenHui Huang, Susan van den Hof, Shu-Min Yang,
Xiao-Lin Wang, Wei Chen, Xue-Hui Fang, HaiFeng Pan BMC Health Services Research 2011,
11:341 (16 December 2011)
• TB treatment initiation and adherence in a
South African community influenced more by
perceptions than by knowledge of tuberculosis
Jane M Cramm, Harry JM Finkenflügel, Valerie
Møller, Anna P Nieboer BMC Public Health 2010,
10:72 (17 February 2010)
• Patient-centred tuberculosis treatment delivery
under programmatic conditions in Tanzania: a
cohort study Saidi Egwaga, Abdallah Mkopi,
Nyagosya Range, Vera Haag-Arbenz, Amuri
Baraka, Penny Grewal, Frank Cobelens, Hassan
Mshinda, Fred Lwilla, Frank van Leth BMC
Medicine 2009, 7:80 (21 December 2009)
• The impact of smoking on adherence to
treatment for latent tuberculosis infection
Mélanie Lavigne, Isabelle Rocher, Colin
Steensma, Paul Brassard BMC Public Health
2006, 6:66 (14 March 2006)
Isi Bahasan Telecoference 4
• Masing-masing makalah PE yang ditemukan
diCA untuk dinilai apakah kesimpulan hasil
penelitian valid.
• Kesimpulan hasil penelitian: Hipotesis
Penelitian (HP) didukung/tidak didukung.
• Kemungkinan keluarannya: (a) kesimpulan
valid HP didukung; (b) kesimpulan valid HP
tidak didukung; atau, (c) kesimpulan tidak
valid.
Contoh Makalah PE
Song Yao, Wen-Hui Huang, Susan van den Hof,
Shu-Min Yang, Xiao-Lin Wang, Wei Chen, XueHui Fang, Hai-Feng Pan. (2011). Treatment
adherence among sputum smear-positive
pulmonary tuberculosis patients in
mountainous areas in China. BMC Health
Services Research 2011, 11:341 (16 December
2011)
Hirarki
Bukti
Sumber: http://www.mededirect.org/faculty.cfm
Conclusion:
In these mountainous areas of China, the TB control
program is not fully functioning according to the guidelines. The majority of patients are not treated under
direct observation, while direct observation by health
care staff was associated with better adherence, both to
drug therapy and re-examinations. Measures should be
taken urgently in these areas to strengthen implementation of the Stop TB strategy
Kesimpulan: Hipotesis Penelitian didukung Kesimpulan
valid?
Kesimpulan tidak valid jika:
a. Kerangka konsep tidak valid
b. Rancangan penelitian lemah
c. Pelaksanaan penelitian tidak sesuai rencana.