The "Elevate" by MAPS Podcast
This is the "Elevate" podcast by the Medical Affairs Professional Society (MAPS). MAPS is the premier non-profit global Medical Affairs organization FOR Medical Affairs professionals BY Medical Affairs professionals across all different levels of experience/specialty. Together with over 15,000+ Medical Affairs members from 280+ companies globally, MAPS is transforming the Medical Affairs profession to increase its value to patients, HCPs, industry and society. JOIN THE MOVEMENT!
The "Elevate" by MAPS Podcast
SciTech & AI Series: Evidence Unlocked: Separating Gold from Gravel
Use Left/Right to seek, Home/End to jump to start or end. Hold shift to jump forward or backward.
Welcome to Episode 1 of the SciTech Critical Evaluation of Literature and AI Series: “Evidence Unlocked: Separating Gold from Gravel"
Not all evidence is created equal, so how do you separate gold from gravel? Join experts from the MAPS Scientific & Technical Knowledge Domain for a fast-paced session designed to simplify critical appraisal for busy professionals. In just a few minutes, you’ll learn how to navigate the hierarchy of evidence and apply practical frameworks. We’ll also share a step-by-step approach for rapid evaluation, helping you assess robustness, and clinical relevance without getting lost in complexity. If you want to make smarter, faster evidence-based decisions, this podcast is for you!
Learning Objectives:
- Understand the hierarchy of evidence
- Explain the differences between randomized controlled trials (RCTs), observational studies, real-world data, and preprints, and why they matter for evidence quality.
- Recognize key frameworks for critical appraisal
- Introduce GRADE, PRISMA, and CONSORT as practical tools for evaluating robustness, reproducibility, and clinical relevance.
- Apply a rapid evaluation approach
- Provide a simple, step-by-step method for quickly assessing scientific literature without compromising rigor.
Hear more from the Scientific & Technical Knowledge Domain through their position paper: "Safeguarding Scientific Rigor in the Critical Evaluation of Literature"