Geoffrey R. Norman

Bio: Geoffrey R. Norman is an academic researcher from McMaster University. The author has contributed to research in topics: Problem-based learning & Curriculum. The author has an hindex of 88, co-authored 362 publications receiving 42978 citations. Previous affiliations of Geoffrey R. Norman include McMaster-Carr & University of Toronto.

Health Measurement Scales: A Practical Guide to Their Development and Use

Abstract: 1. Introduction 2. Basic concepts 3. Devising the items 4. Scaling responses 5. Selecting the items 6. Biases in responding 7. From items to scales 8. Reliability 9. Generalizability theory 10. Validity 11. Measuring change 12. Item response theory 13. Methods of administration 14. Ethical considerations 15. Reporting test results Appendices

Interpretation of changes in health-related quality of life the remarkable universality of half a standard deviation

Abstract: Background A number of studies have computed the minimally important difference (MID) for health-related quality of life instruments. Objective To determine whether there is consistency in the magnitude of MID estimates from different instruments. Methods We conducted a systematic review of the literature to identify studies that computed an MID and contained sufficient information to compute an effect size (ES). Thirty-eight studies fulfilled the criteria, resulting in 62 ESs. Results For all but 6 studies, the MID estimates were close to one half a SD (mean = 0.495, SD = 0.155). There was no consistent relationship with factors such as disease-specific or generic instrument or the number of response options. Negative changes were not associated with larger ESs. Population-based estimation procedures and brief follow-up were associated with smaller ESs, and acute conditions with larger ESs. An explanation for this consistency is that research in psychology has shown that the limit of people's ability to discriminate over a wide range of tasks is approximately 1 part in 7, which is very close to half a SD. Conclusion In most circumstances, the threshold of discrimination for changes in health-related quality of life for chronic diseases appears to be approximately half a SD.

Biostatistics : The Bare Essentials

Abstract: Section 1: THE NATURE OF DATA AND STATISTICS 1. The Basics 2. Looking at the Data: A First Look at Graphing Data 3. Describing the Data with Numbers: Measures of Central Tendency and Dispersion 4. The Normal Distribution 5. Probability 6. Elements of Statistical Inference C.R.A.P. Detectors Section 2: ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE 7. Comparing Two Groups: The t-Test 8. More than Two Groups: One-Way ANOVA 9. Factorial ANOVA 10. Two Repeated Observations: The Paired t-Test and Alternatives 11. Repeated Measures ANOVA 12. Multivariate ANOVA (MANOVA) C.R.A.P. Detectors Section 3: REGRESSION AND CORRELATION 13. Simple Regression and Correlation 14. Multiple Regression 15. Logistic Regression 16. Advanced Topics in Regression and ANOVA 17. Measuring Change 18. Principal Components and Factor Analysis: Fooling Around with Factors 19. Structural Equation Modeling C.R.A.P. Detectors Section 4: NONPARAMETRIC STATISTICS 20. Tests of Significance for Categorical Frequency Data 21. Measures of Association for Categorical Data 22. Tests of Significance for Ranked Data 23. Measures of Association for Ranked Data 24. Life Table (Survival) Analysis C.R.A.P. Detectors Section 5: REPRISE 25. Screwups, Oddballs, and other Vagaries of Science: Locating Outliers, Handling Missing Data, and Transformations 26. Putting It All Together Test Yourself (Being a Compendium of Questions and Answers) Answers to Chapter Exercises References and Further Readings Unabashed Glossary Appendices

The psychological basis of problem-based learning: A review of the evidence

Abstract: Several potential advantages for students' learning are claimed for problem-based learning (PBL). Students in PBL curricula may be more highly motivated; they may be better problem solvers and self-directed learners; they may be better able to learn and recall information; and they may be better able to integrate basic science knowledge into the solutions of clinical problems. Although some of these claims find theoretical support from the literature on the psychology of learning, to date there has been no review of the experimental evidence supporting the possible differences in students' learning that can be attributed to PBL. In this review article, the authors examine each claim critically in light of that evidence. They conclude that (1) there is no evidence that PBL curricula result in any improvement in general, content-free problem-solving skills; (2) learning in a PBL format may initially reduce levels of learning but may foster, over periods up to several years, increased retention of knowledge; (3) some preliminary evidence suggests that PBL curricula may enhance both transfer of concepts to new problems and integration of basic science concepts into clinical problems; (4) PBL enhances intrinsic interest in the subject matter; and (5) PBL appears to enhance self-directed learning skills, and this enhancement may be maintained.

Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions

Abstract: The Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions is the official document that describes in detail the process of preparing and maintaining Cochrane systematic reviews on the effects of healthcare interventions.

Stress, social support, and the buffering hypothesis.

Abstract: Examines whether the positive association between social support and well-being is attributable more to an overall beneficial effect of support (main- or direct-effect model) or to a process of support protecting persons from potentially adverse effects of stressful events (buffering model). The review of studies is organized according to (1) whether a measure assesses support structure (the existence of relationships) or function (the extent to which one's interpersonal relationships provide particular resources) and (2) the degree of specificity (vs globality) of the scale. Special attention is given to methodological characteristics that are requisite for a fair comparison of the models. It is concluded that there is evidence consistent with both models. Evidence for the buffering model is found when the social support measure assesses the perceived availability of interpersonal resources that are responsive to the needs elicited by stressful events. Evidence for a main effect model is found when the support measure assesses a person's degree of integration in a large social network. Both conceptualizations of social support are correct in some respects, but each represents a different process through which social support may affect well-being. Implications for theories of social support processes and for the design of preventive interventions are discussed.