@UW_LSC @UWUniverCity 2/ A priority of this "classroom learning," then, when inviting the general public to enlighten the academic world, is -- speedier results! "It is frequently stated that it takes an average of 17 years for research evidence to reach
@michal_ptacnik @Vuvuzuelan @itsdavidramms Regarding point 2, a few things to think about: 1) the time delay between best current research / best practices and daily praxis by your dr is around 17 years: https://t.co/V1NhxKxitM.
The answer is 17 years, what is the question: understanding time lags in translational research - Zoë Slote Morris, Steven Wooding, Jonathan Grant, 2011 https://t.co/MTdbW76G9Z
RT @pash22: "The answer is 17 years, what is the question: understanding time lags in translational research" via @drstevenwooding et al
"The answer is 17 years, what is the question: understanding time lags in translational research" via @drstevenwooding et al
@pash22 @deb_cohen @annieg76 @mgtmccartney @susan_bewley @jimgthornton @Liz_ORiordan @AnniceMukherjee @ProfJoyceHarper @PharmRJ @ProfRobHoward @seb_walsh @ajlees @LonSchneiderMD @EWidera It's the question that drives us... Question: How long does knowledg
The answer based on this 2011 study was 17 years for knowledge translation in medicine. That was only for 14% of the high-quality, clinically relevant information. https://t.co/uvaIh2MxMT SGEM Xtra Matrix Episode: SoMe for KT https://t.co/nrFGF6Fwv9 http
@_Andy_Boyd_ @sciam So out of the numerous studies highlighted in the article, you cherrypick one study. And even that study acknowledges multiple other studies found cognitive impairment and speculate why their data set may not show it. Relevant: https
When you visit a GP, how recent do you think the information & treatment you’re getting is? Did you know Oz GPs aren’t allowed to talk about any treatment you’re getting that’s been disproven or questioned by recent research? https://t.co/9sEGux3HPE
The answer is 17 years, what is the question: understanding time lags in translational research https://t.co/tLZEogs6UT
@ValerieJay16 They aren't reading it. This showed it took an ave. of 17yrs from research to clinical practice. Now imagine that there's also an active disinterest in finding out that you are subjecting yourself & patients to a deadly & disabling
Imagine you’re reading a recipe book (scientific research) and deciding to cook a meal (medical practice). It's not just about finding a recipe....
@PTPintcast Moi
@AdamDiscovers @kushogqueen @ghost_gurney @alandrummond2 @MaryFernando_ @CAEP_Docs @SRPCanada @DrLKVaughan @NightShiftMD @CanadianKayMD @TrevorJain @snewbery1 @AshleyFoxRPN @DrSimonMc I know in medicine there is a knowledge translation gap and it has been
@BowTied_Bengal that 17 year figure is used to describe the opposite--clinical practice lagging behind https://t.co/Fku5JXGsbH i've also heard (although i don't have a source) that the OCS can test you on any relevant research that's been published up to
@FelidaeRex @jimmy_dore For now you’d be better off asking an aerosol scientist and an epidemiologist. Some physicians stay very up to date on the latest research but certainly not all: https://t.co/a1X1vTyk69 Plz read these: https://t.co/acIfJld1bp htt
@MaryFernando_ @raghu_venugopal @CAEP_Docs @alandrummond2 Thank you @MaryFernando_ @alandrummond2 @raghu_venugopal @TrevorJain and all the others who have been advocating for years. We know that there is a knowledge translation gap. It can take 17 year
@clrsassymonkey @ABDanielleSmith @AHS_media 27 hours later it was ‘peer reviewed and published’ . I seriously pray to God you’re not a practicing Pharmacist. It takes 17 years to conduct a Randomized Controlled study from the begging of the study until it
@WildColonialGal @amnewtonPhD @JordanCrane2 @westaustralian @Flinty_01 @dystopian_DU @Jikkyleaks Not necessarily. 2problems; time from research to practice is 17yrs, & Drs have confirmation bias. Oz Drs aren’t allowed to discuss research with pts unles
"There's no link between serotonin levels and depression." It's a massive marketing con that continues to today. The time lag from research to a doctor's office is, on average, 17 years. With SSRIs, it's been decades. https://t.co/wDiJgJiegd https://t
RT @earnest_rs: @isaiah_bb You've clearly decided not to listen to the most impacted during this pandemic, but for anyone actually interest…
@isaiah_bb You've clearly decided not to listen to the most impacted during this pandemic, but for anyone actually interested, research shows that it can take many years for new research to get into the hands of your family doctor. https://t.co/0Z8kS7hZ6H
@HomersOzPol @FfatAnnie @VidyaSzym @EbonyJHilton_MD Heather is right. Hopefully @VidyaSzym will take this as an opportunity to catch up on the scientific evidence and use it to provide better patient care. https://t.co/VjKQsUqAWN https://t.co/vNyP2W0Hih
@2022onward @RougeMatisse @lisa_iannattone @CMQ_org @CIUSSSE_CHUS "It is frequently stated that it takes an average of 17 years for research evidence to reach clinical practice" YES, 17 YEARS! https://t.co/bP2rKCGSYL
Aussies are completely unaware: 1 Drs are not allowed to inform Pts of any research which does not support current practice! 2 Practice trails research by a staggering 17 years on average. You are not getting latest research or treatment at your GP. https:
On average, it takes 17 years for new science to be put into practice. Think what that means about nutrition. https://t.co/P1FKui1ZVM
@OcarinaJones @Patrici46633494 Almost nobody is aware of “translation time” - the time taken for medical research to become practice; this is 17yrs on average. https://t.co/9sEGux3HPE Ppl are also completely unaware that AHPRA regs are such that Drs can’t
@DanBockmannDC If it is true it takes 17 years for evidence to be translated to real world practice, then yes all evidence will appear to be old news. Innovation & evidence are not mutually exclusive. Clinical practice is the ideas soup and N of 1 is
RT @sogafi_galicia: A motivación das vindeiras #3XSogafi : traballar para reducir a brecha de ata 17 anos para a implementación da mellor e…
@lcarballo_costa @aefisio Hola Lidia! Moitas grazas polas tuas verbas. Hai varias fontes sobre o dato, as máis importantes son as que sinalan vías de solución: https://t.co/BerJoxKwjo
RT @sogafi_galicia: A motivación das vindeiras #3XSogafi : traballar para reducir a brecha de ata 17 anos para a implementación da mellor e…
RT @sogafi_galicia: A motivación das vindeiras #3XSogafi : traballar para reducir a brecha de ata 17 anos para a implementación da mellor e…
RT @sogafi_galicia: A motivación das vindeiras #3XSogafi : traballar para reducir a brecha de ata 17 anos para a implementación da mellor e…
A motivación das vindeiras #3XSogafi : traballar para reducir a brecha de ata 17 anos para a implementación da mellor evidencia científica nos servizos de saúde. 📌 Vigo, 20-21 outubro 2023. 👉🏻 https://t.co/wJR5XfmFKc
@KLVeritas This, Kat. ⬇️ We know the problem but not the solution. https://t.co/9sEGux3HPE
The time taken from when research is done until it gets to the patient by way of information, Rx, or surgery is 17 years on average. This is known as “translational time”. This has got increasingly worse, year on year, since the first RCTs of the ‘50s. htt
RT @MaritaHennessy: It's a figure that's often cited, & debated, but resonates here...Great talk John Thompson! The answer is 17 years, wh…
RT @MaritaHennessy: It's a figure that's often cited, & debated, but resonates here...Great talk John Thompson! The answer is 17 years, wh…
It's a figure that's often cited, & debated, but resonates here...Great talk John Thompson! The answer is 17 years, what is the question: understanding time lags in translational research https://t.co/fwH4YBMcJp @ISPIDConference #ISPID2023
@DrZoffness @PTPintcast Here is the original article
@cherpers @fuckyouiquit https://t.co/xBKnX435kv nah. think more the publish or perish model, where article processing charges and other fees fuel publication bias and so research gets done over and over and over again. oh and also patent law and lobbying.
@theliverdr It's not my role to know this sorry as too many organisations globally to monitor. Were you aware it takes an AVERAGE of 17 years for research to become adopted and more years before policies get updated & training rolled out. https://t.c
@ntisec @nhgnieuws @de_specialisten In NL is de gemiddelde termijn voor transfer van research-resultaten naar de klinische praktijk ongeveer 20 à 25 jaar. (Internationaal 17 jaar). https://t.co/KlYHOG3gj5
RT @Retlouping: “Houston we have a problem.” 24 hours on Twitter. The paradox of evidence, evidence based practice, adoption of evidence,…
RT @Retlouping: “Houston we have a problem.” 24 hours on Twitter. The paradox of evidence, evidence based practice, adoption of evidence,…
@airambulancedoc Dann aber leider viele Jahre, laut Balas und Bohen 17 Jahre. https://t.co/BhzyyJxFvg
@ArtDuCombat @michelseydur @thinkin_mkdeabh @GeekNfit @PierreElieB @Leya_MK @KineMeuh @BhengHeng @g_deville_kine @G_Rousson @NicolasAdenis De plus, le transfert dans la pratique d'une nouvelle connaissance prend du temps, mais ça dépend de pas mal de chose
@Kate3015 It takes an average of 17yrs for medical research to become practice. New research which may contradict current practice may fall under the bill’s ambit. https://t.co/9sEGux3HPE Research on vaccine NSEs is already censored by AHPRA regulations.
RT @moy_qmac: @niklaus2009 Yo lo sé dr, pero en medicina existe cierto "lag" de cuando se descubre algo y se vuelven conocimiento generaliz…
RT @moy_qmac: @niklaus2009 Yo lo sé dr, pero en medicina existe cierto "lag" de cuando se descubre algo y se vuelven conocimiento generaliz…
@niklaus2009 Yo lo sé dr, pero en medicina existe cierto "lag" de cuando se descubre algo y se vuelven conocimiento generalizado. El estimado son 17 años :( https://t.co/CWugC2mKdY
@dyctiostelium @mbeisen This is the closest I could remeber: https://t.co/KUN62nNLPm As with everything... it depends. Fore example, everybody was prescribing steroids shortly after the ReCovery results were known.
@mbeisen This might be similar https://t.co/wq8qXpyZbL https://t.co/zRmLrFP1o0
@enhancedathlete That’s because there’s an estimated 17 year lag between the time medical research is published and the time it’s put into clinical practice https://t.co/yKBcdc9nA7
The care you're getting today is 17 years old 17 years https://t.co/Z6Lc6HZ8jJ
RT @TheSGEM: @reverendofdoubt The leaky pipe model. It can take 17 yrs to get high-quality, clinically relevant information to the patient.…
@reverendofdoubt The leaky pipe model. It can take 17 yrs to get high-quality, clinically relevant information to the patient. https://t.co/hzsIi062O0 https://t.co/PUexfrnxHT
@limits_stop There’s also this paper offering convergence on the 17 year figure and a detailed breakdown of the Whys https://t.co/yiYVOgPcDK
@CRM_saves_lives @ZoiNetou @mfab112 @chueser3 @docfettzi @Moeritzl Neue Erkenntnisse in der täglichen Praxis etablieren. https://t.co/BhzyyJxFvg Was beim heutigen rasanten Hinzugewinn an Wissen leider oft zu langsam ist, wo wir wieder auf den Ursprungstwe
Read more here: https://t.co/iFHd82m568
@StabellBenn @MaartOKok As you are aware, we have a stringent regulation in Oz that HCWs can’t discuss research with patients unless it directly supports current practice. The problem is that practice trail’s research by many years, obviously to the detrim
RT @ThisisMEtweety: @ElkeAsen @ahandvanish You don’t want to know. From the point at which something becomes *established* in the evidence…
@ElkeAsen @ahandvanish You don’t want to know. From the point at which something becomes *established* in the evidence base (and this hasn’t become established yet), typical times to adoption are usually quoted as between 7 and 20 yrs. It *has* to be faste
From 2011 "It is frequently stated that it takes an average of 17 years for research evidence to reach clinical practice" The answer is 17 years, what is the question: understanding time lags in translational research https://t.co/NiaZxuOlMD
RT @AndrsLogrono: Toma un promedio de 17 años para que la evidencia de la investigación médica llegue a la práctica clínica para el benefic…
Toma un promedio de 17 años para que la evidencia de la investigación médica llegue a la práctica clínica para el beneficio de los pacientes. 🤯 #fisioterapia #salud https://t.co/lIy3Ln4f1H.
RT @FreedomKeepersU: How long does it take research evidence to reach clinical practice? The answer is 17 years. (On average!) https://t.co…
@Hamishmcmack @NightShiftMD @SAEMEBM @JonathanEdlow @PeterJohns84 @emlitofnote @KirstyChallen @AcademicEmerMed @EmergencyDocs @emergmedottawa The majority of things in medicine can take >10yrs to be widely adopted into practice according to this publica
RT @LocalRachel: It takes an average of 17 years for scientific research to become medical practice (and much of it is ignored anyway if no…
@Laskowskak654 @PKitaDziedzic Średnio 17 lat zajmuje, aby najnowsze odkrycia medyczne trafiły do gabinetu waszego lekarza. – Źródło: J R Soc Med. 2011 Dec;104(12):510-20. The answer is 17 years, what is the question: understanding time lags in translationa
@BobVermeeren @kieranosull I’ll be dead and won’t really care “17 years” the real world can wait 😂
RT @Retlouping: “Houston we have a problem.” 24 hours on Twitter. The paradox of evidence, evidence based practice, adoption of evidence,…
RT @Retlouping: Nice to see the new CFT trial published. BUT many haven’t read the study & are in a high on promoting CFT wildly as the new…
Nice to see the new CFT trial published. BUT many haven’t read the study & are in a high on promoting CFT wildly as the new savior. Brakes on tweeps, it looks like a well run study , but where are the critiques? Just because your bias is confirmed, why
@ChristieSmythe Yup. It's funny; in public hlth, ppl can have a skewed perspective of time: 19.9% of clinical trials required >4 yrs to complete enrollment https://t.co/sXZFusmqoa The answer is 17 yrs, what is the question: understanding time lags...
@Miszel1906 @NonPossumus Średnio 17 lat zajmuje, aby najnowsze odkrycia medyczne trafiły do gabinetu waszego lekarza. – Źródło: J R Soc Med. 2011 Dec;104(12):510-20. The answer is 17 years, what is the question: understanding time lags in translational res
@bigfatsurprise Then you won’t like this paper, Nina. 😊 https://t.co/9sEGux3HPE
RT @docdave53: @MeetJess A little off topic: Very few people understand just how far practice lags behind research. On average it’s 17 year…
RT @docdave53: @MeetJess A little off topic: Very few people understand just how far practice lags behind research. On average it’s 17 year…
@MeetJess A little off topic: Very few people understand just how far practice lags behind research. On average it’s 17 years, & I believe in paediatrics it’s 25. So yes, we really don’t know what’s coming. https://t.co/9sEGux3HPE
@AndreaDona60 @MeetJess I can assure you of my best intentions. I was a medical herbalist for 31 yrs & debulked specific tumours prior to surgery. I only share research I’m sure about, esp 💉NSEs. Many many pts don’t respond satisfactorily to medical Tx
It's curious that among the most cited (over 2.3k) papers supporting a "17-year implementation gap" actually... does not support that there is a 17-year implementation gap. https://t.co/nTg7252Ig8 Is it a zombie statistic?
@AndrewJSauer This is why we need to design better research, trials, better practice, to overcome barriers, not ignoring them. And this is not new: https://t.co/ElJkpijiwl
RT @TheSGEM: Here is the original article from 13 years ago that it can take 17 years for 14% of the information to make it to the patient.…
RT @TheSGEM: Here is the original article from 13 years ago that it can take 17 years for 14% of the information to make it to the patient.…
RT @TheSGEM: Here is the original article from 13 years ago that it can take 17 years for 14% of the information to make it to the patient.…
RT @JuanGrvas: @pitiklinov @FITrebelde 17 o 20 años, depende. Pero es algo que conocemos de siempre The answer is 17 years, what is the que…
Here is the original article from 13 years ago that it can take 17 years for 14% of the information to make it to the patient. Only four years to go if we stick with the current KT model. https://t.co/uvaIh2N5Cr
@pitiklinov @FITrebelde 17 o 20 años, depende. Pero es algo que conocemos de siempre The answer is 17 years, what is the question: understanding time lags in translational research https://t.co/l4TtUqX5Q4 Knowledge Translation: The Missing Link between Res
@yvonnezlam Oh this is very interesting, thank you! Found some tidbits from the original linked study (from 2011!) and it seems like there's still a lot of opportunity to even improve how often & how well we measure the lags from research -> imple
RT @JuanGrvas: ¿Cuántos años tarda en llegar a la clínica diaria lo que se demuestra que es útil? Entre 17 y 20 años. The answer is 17 yea…
RT @JuanGrvas: ¿Cuántos años tarda en llegar a la clínica diaria lo que se demuestra que es útil? Entre 17 y 20 años. The answer is 17 yea…