Malmivaara Antti, Koes Bart W, Bouter Lex M, van Tulder Maurits W
Finnish Office for Health Technology Assessment, FinOHTA/Stakes, Helsinki, Finland.
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2006 Jun 1;31(13):1405-9. doi: 10.1097/01.brs.0000219868.30427.66.
A critical appraisal of the literature.
To increase awareness of the importance of applicability and clinical relevance of the results of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in the field of spinal disorders by formulating a list of items for assessment of applicability and clinical relevance of results of RCTs.
In systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials (RCTs), critical appraisal of methodologic quality is considered important. Less attention has been paid to the assessment of the applicability and the clinical relevance of the results.
RCTs in an update of the Cochrane review on exercise therapy for low back pain were used. Most of the trials did not score positively on the five Cochrane Back Review Group basic items describing patients: intervention and setting, outcome, effect size, and benefits related to adverse effects. Item 1 was met by 88% of the trials, but item 2 only by 51%, item 3 by 67%, item 4 by 35%, and item 5 by 0%. Subsequently, a more comprehensive list of items for the assessment of applicability and clinical relevance of results of RCTs was developed. These criteria were pilot tested on the RCTs. After pilot testing and a subsequent consensus meeting, the list of items was drafted and circulated among the members of the Editorial Board of the Cochrane Back Review Group. Changes were made in response to comments.
The final list consists of 40 items. The items are ordered on two headings: Does the report enable the assessment of applicability? Are the study results clinically relevant? We present examples of informative and noninformative reporting of RCTs in order to illustrate how information on applicability and clinical relevance of results can be assessed.
Authors of RCTs should adequately report on items that are essential to assess the applicability and clinical relevance of results. The presented list of items may help clinicians reading RCTs and authors of systematic reviews to draw more balanced conclusions on applicability and clinical relevance of results.
对文献的批判性评价。
通过制定一份用于评估随机对照试验(RCT)结果的适用性和临床相关性的条目清单,提高对脊柱疾病领域中随机对照试验结果的适用性和临床相关性重要性的认识。
在随机对照试验(RCT)的系统评价中,对方法学质量的批判性评价被认为很重要。而对结果的适用性和临床相关性的评估则较少受到关注。
使用Cochrane关于腰痛运动疗法综述更新中的随机对照试验。大多数试验在描述患者的五个Cochrane背部综述组基本条目上得分不高:干预措施和环境、结局、效应量以及与不良反应相关的益处。88%的试验符合条目1,但只有51%符合条目2,67%符合条目3,35%符合条目4,0%符合条目5。随后,制定了一份更全面的用于评估随机对照试验结果的适用性和临床相关性的条目清单。这些标准在随机对照试验上进行了预试验。经过预试验和随后的共识会议后,起草了条目清单并在Cochrane背部综述组编辑委员会成员中传阅。根据意见进行了修改。
最终清单包含40个条目。这些条目分为两个标题:该报告是否能使对适用性的评估成为可能?研究结果是否具有临床相关性?我们给出了随机对照试验信息丰富和缺乏信息的报告示例,以说明如何评估结果的适用性和临床相关性信息。
随机对照试验的作者应充分报告对评估结果的适用性和临床相关性至关重要的条目。所呈现的条目清单可能有助于阅读随机对照试验的临床医生和系统评价的作者就结果的适用性和临床相关性得出更平衡的结论。