Evidence-based healthcare 10 years on: is the National Institute of Clinical Studies the answer?
Authors: Louise V Hall, Allison E Lauder and Chris A Silagy
Published online: 21 January 2002
In reply: The Board of the National Institute of Clinical Studies (NICS) agrees strongly with Hall and Lauder that closing the gap between evidence and practice involves input from consumers. We also agree that the Board of Directors should seek to incorporate input from consumers in its strategic and operational activities.
Of equal concern to the Board is ensuring the input of other stakeholder groups also currently not reflected in the composition of Board membership. For example, nursing and allied health professions comprise about 80% of the healthcare workforce and have shown strong leadership in relation to evidence-based practice. We are keen to see such groups actively involved in all aspects of the Institute's work.
As a Federal Government-owned company, the selection and appointment process for Board members is the responsibility of government and our constitution does not allow the Board to change its own membership. However, the Board is seeking input from both consumers and other key stakeholder groups, both through its initial consultation processes and through establishment of Board advisory groups specifically focused on consumer issues and nursing and allied health. These groups will provide direct and valued input into the strategic and operational activities of the NICS.
Our first round of consultation, with over 300 organisations, highlighted a number of areas where there are currently major gaps between evidence and practice, such as cardiac failure, various forms of cancer treatment, prevention of deep vein thrombosis in hospitalised patients, prevention of bedsores, and prescribing of psychotropic drugs for children. We are now examining ways in which the NICS might usefully help in some of these areas to identify barriers and possible solutions that can be rolled out across the healthcare system and sustained. The success of the NICS in achieving this will depend on the willingness of all stakeholders (including health professionals, consumers and managers) to work together in a constructive way.
Interpreting Australian Stillbirth Rate Trends: Implications for Surveillance and Continuous Quality Improvement
Aleena M. Wojcieszek, Kirstine Sketcher-Baker, Christine Andrews, Michael Coory, Imogen Kettle, Melissa Malivoire, David Ellwood, Vicki Flenady
Paracetamol in Pregnancy: Uncertain Evidence, Certain Consequences
David J. Tunnicliffe, Miranda Cumpston, Debra Kennedy, Margie Danchin, Armando Teixeira-Pinto
Fatty Liver Disease in Australia: A Narrative Review on the Epidemiology, Natural History, Prognostication and Management in People With Metabolic Dysfunction
Karl Vaz, Daniel Clayton-Chubb, William W. Kemp, Stuart K. Roberts, Ammar Majeed
Birth prevalence, clinical sequelae, and management of congenital cytomegalovirus infections in Australia, 1999–2023: a national prospective study
Ece Egilmezer, Suzy M Teutsch, Carlos Nunez, Stuart T Hamilton, Adam W Bartlett, Pamela Palasanthiran, Elizabeth J Elliott, William D Rawlinson
The number of cancer‐related deaths that could be attributable to spatial disparities in survival in Australia, 2010–2019: a retrospective population‐based cohort study
Charlotte K Bainomugisa, Jessica Cameron, Paramita Dasgupta, Peter Baade
Mandatory research projects during medical specialist training in Australia and New Zealand
Paulina Stehlik, Caitlin Brandenburg, David A Henry