Suppr超能文献

公共卫生的批判性评价:一份新的清单。

Critical appraisal for public health: a new checklist.

作者信息

Heller Richard F, Verma Arpana, Gemmell Islay, Harrison Roger, Hart Judy, Edwards Richard

机构信息

Evidence for Population Health Unit, Division of Epidemiology and Health Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester M13 9PT, UK.

出版信息

Public Health. 2008 Jan;122(1):92-8. doi: 10.1016/j.puhe.2007.04.012. Epub 2007 Sep 4.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

There have been a number of attempts to develop critical appraisal tools, but few have had a public health focus. This paper describes a new checklist with public health aspects.

STUDY DESIGN

Review of previous appraisal instruments and pilot test of new checklist.

METHODS

Criteria of particular reference to public health practice were added to well-established appraisal criteria. The checklist was piloted with 21 public health professionals, research staff or postgraduate students.

RESULTS

The checklist is organized using the 'ask', 'collect', 'understand' and 'use' categories of the Population Health Evidence Cycle. Readers are asked to assess validity, completeness and transferability of the data as they relate to: the study question; key aspects of the methodology; possible public health implications of the key results; and the implications for implementation in their own public health practice. Of the 21 public health professionals that piloted the checklist, 20 said that they found the checklist useful and 18 would use it or recommend it in the future. Participants were prepared to commit to the majority of the questions, and there was good agreement with a consensus of 'correct' answers.

CONCLUSIONS

The public health critical appraisal checklist adds public health aspects that were missing from previous critical appraisal tools.

摘要

目标

已有多项开发批判性评价工具的尝试,但很少有以公共卫生为重点的。本文介绍了一个包含公共卫生方面内容的新清单。

研究设计

回顾先前的评价工具并对新清单进行预试验。

方法

在成熟的评价标准中加入特别针对公共卫生实践的标准。该清单在21名公共卫生专业人员、研究人员或研究生中进行了预试验。

结果

该清单按照人群健康证据循环的“提问”“收集”“理解”和“应用”类别进行组织。要求读者评估数据与以下方面相关时的有效性、完整性和可转移性:研究问题;方法学的关键方面;关键结果可能对公共卫生产生的影响;以及在其自身公共卫生实践中的实施意义。在参与清单预试验的21名公共卫生专业人员中,20人表示他们认为该清单有用,18人表示未来会使用或推荐它。参与者愿意认可大多数问题,并且与“正确”答案的共识有很好的一致性。

结论

公共卫生批判性评价清单增加了先前批判性评价工具中缺失的公共卫生方面内容。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验