Everything between a search box and a clinical decision
Applied Evidence reads clinical research in full, writes a summary for the discipline reading it, and puts the new ones that match what you treat in your feed. Papers we cannot read in full are left out rather than summarised from an abstract.
Clinical search, narrowed the way a clinician narrows.
Filter by discipline, sub-specialty, study type and year, so a meta-analysis in your field is two clicks away and a case report in someone else’s is not there at all.
Summaries with the caveats left in.
A one-line finding, the key results, how it was done — and a standing section on what it does not show and how it most often gets misread.
Whether the cuff pressure was regulated or fixed before exercise made no difference to gains in strength or muscle size. Blood flow restriction training itself gave only small gains over the same exercise without it.
- 01Whether the cuff pressure was regulated or fixed before exercise made no difference to strength gains: repetition-maximum strength (P = 0.62) and dynamometry strength (P = 0.88) did not differ between the two systems.
- 02Pooled across studies, blood flow restriction exercise beat the same exercise without restriction by a small margin for repetition-maximum strength (effect size 0.27) and muscle cross-sectional area (0.27), and by a negligible margin for dynamometry strength (0.13) and muscle anthropometry (0.03).
Do not read this as proof that any cuff system will do. No trial has randomised people to a regulated or an unregulated system; this review compared separate studies that used one or the other, which the authors themselves say is weaker than a head-to-head trial.
Written for the discipline reading it.
PROThe clinical implication is written separately for each discipline a paper applies to — what it means for a physio’s caseload is not what it means for an SLP’s.
A library that remembers why you kept it.
Save a paper into a collection and write a private note on what made it worth keeping. Only you can see it, and it follows you to any device you sign in on.
Every summary is filed for the discipline reading it.
Pick your discipline and sub-specialties at sign-up and your feed follows that choice. Every paper is filed under the sub-specialties it belongs to.
Loading, dosage and progression criteria — what the protocol actually was, and whether it transfers to your caseload.
Whether a finding shows up in everyday occupation or only in timed capacity testing — and what to measure to know.
Delivery mode, dose and generalisation to untrained items — the details that decide whether a protocol survives your clinic.
Whether a finding changes the assessment, the monitoring or the teaching a nurse does on shift, and what it would take to adopt it on a ward.
Free to search, three full summaries a month.
Pro is $1 a month with the first month free. No card to create an account; Pro takes one at checkout and charges nothing until the month is up.