Neely J G, Hartman J M, Wallace M S
Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Missouri 63110, USA.
Laryngoscope. 2001 Jan;111(1):70-6. doi: 10.1097/00005537-200101000-00012.
This is the second part in a series of sequential Tutorials in Clinical Research. The objective of this tutorial is to introduce methods of searching the vast stores of information now available, to review some of the computer resources available, to reintroduce the concept of an a priori design for the search, and to reveal the need for assessment of the clinical importance and validity of each pertinent article found.
Tutorial.
An open working group has been formed with the specific aim of surveying and translating the large volume of complex information on research design and statistics into easily understood, useable, and non-threatening tutorials for the busy practitioner. The hypotheses under which this work is conducted are highly intelligent, but extremely busy, surgeons are interested in evidence-based medicine and will increase personal participation in critical reading of the literature, pending an expanded familiarity with clinical research design and statistics.
Available resources for literature searching, methods of quick personal overviews, and quick question-specific reviews are discussed. Additionally, the methods, with examples, of beginning a critical literature review are presented.
Rapid, personal, critical literature review requires succinct formulation of the question, efficient search for the best available evidence, and critical appraisal of the pertinent individual articles to determine if sufficient evidence exists to support a clinical contention.
这是临床研究系列连续性教程的第二部分。本教程的目的是介绍搜索当前可用海量信息的方法，回顾一些可用的计算机资源，重新引入搜索的先验设计概念，并揭示评估所找到的每篇相关文章的临床重要性和有效性的必要性。
教程。
已成立一个开放的工作小组，其具体目标是将关于研究设计和统计学的大量复杂信息调查并翻译成易于理解、可用且不会令忙碌的从业者感到有压力的教程。开展这项工作所依据的假设是，高智商但极其忙碌的外科医生对循证医学感兴趣，并且在对临床研究设计和统计学有更深入了解之前，会增加个人对文献批判性阅读的参与度。
讨论了文献搜索的可用资源、快速个人概览的方法以及针对特定问题的快速回顾方法。此外，还介绍了开始批判性文献综述的方法及示例。
快速、个人化的批判性文献综述需要简洁地提出问题，高效搜索最佳可得证据，并对相关的个别文章进行批判性评估，以确定是否有足够的证据支持临床观点。
