• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

促进临床评估科学发展的更好政策。

Better policy to promote the evaluative clinical sciences.

作者信息

Wennberg J E

机构信息

Center for the Evaluative Clinical Sciences Dartmouth Medical School, Hanover, NH 03756.

出版信息

Qual Assur Health Care. 1990;2(1):21-9. doi: 10.1093/intqhc/2.1.21.

DOI:10.1093/intqhc/2.1.21
PMID:2103869
Abstract
  1. The failure to evaluate the outcomes of surgical practice, diagnostic tests and the uses made of hospitals contrasts sharply with the careful evaluations now mandated for drugs. This double standard for truth in medicine compromises the rationality of medical decisions with significant, deleterious consequences for patients and the health care economy. The uncertainty physicians face about the scientifically correct way to practice medicine results in large variations in the costs and quality of care, even among sophisticated medical communities. The examples of variations between Boston and New Haven are discussed in this paper. 2. Uncertainty about the scientifically and ethically correct way to practice medicine is not inevitable. The double standard for truth can be removed by extending science policy to include the systematic assessment of different treatment theories physicians use in treating common illnesses. Experience (discussed in this presentation) shows that such assessments result in a substantial improvement in the scientific basis of medicine that is of value to patients, physicians and all who are concerned about the quality of care. 3. Information that will improve the scientific basis of medicine for patients, physicians and policy makers can be obtained within a few years--as few as two or three--and without regulation. Conditions should be targeted for assessment that affect the most patients and are of importance to those concerned about cost and quality. It is imperative that the assessments be conducted according to high scientific standards and become an integral part of a nation's medical research program. 4. My paper elaborates on the need for the program, strategies for assessments and the principles that should guide science policy.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
摘要
  1. 对外科手术、诊断测试以及医院利用情况的结果评估缺失,与当前对药物要求的严格评估形成鲜明对比。医学领域这种关于真相的双重标准损害了医疗决策的合理性,给患者和医疗经济带来了重大的有害后果。医生在医学实践的科学正确方法上所面临的不确定性,导致了医疗成本和质量的巨大差异,即使在成熟的医疗群体中也是如此。本文讨论了波士顿和纽黑文之间差异的例子。2. 医学实践在科学和伦理正确方法上的不确定性并非不可避免。通过扩展科学政策,将医生在治疗常见疾病时所使用的不同治疗理论的系统评估纳入其中,就可以消除关于真相的双重标准。经验(在本报告中讨论)表明,这样的评估会使医学的科学基础有实质性改善,这对患者、医生以及所有关心医疗质量的人都有价值。3. 能为患者、医生和政策制定者改善医学科学基础的信息,在短短两三年的时间内就可以获得,而且无需监管。应该针对那些影响最多患者且对关心成本和质量的人至关重要的情况进行评估。评估必须按照高科学标准进行,并成为国家医学研究项目的一个组成部分。4. 我的论文详细阐述了该项目的必要性、评估策略以及应指导科学政策的原则。(摘要截选至250字)

相似文献

1
Better policy to promote the evaluative clinical sciences.促进临床评估科学发展的更好政策。
Qual Assur Health Care. 1990;2(1):21-9. doi: 10.1093/intqhc/2.1.21.
2
The patient experience of patient-centered communication with nurses in the hospital setting: a qualitative systematic review protocol.医院环境中患者与护士以患者为中心的沟通体验:一项定性系统评价方案
JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2015 Jan;13(1):76-87. doi: 10.11124/jbisrir-2015-1072.
3
Baby doe redux? The Department of Health and Human Services and the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act of 2002: a cautionary note on normative neonatal practice.“婴儿多伊”事件重演?美国卫生与公众服务部及2002年《出生时存活婴儿保护法》:关于规范新生儿医疗行为的警示
Pediatrics. 2005 Oct;116(4):e576-85. doi: 10.1542/peds.2005-1590.
4
Culture of Care: Organizational Responsibilities关怀文化:组织职责
5
Telemedicine for the Medicare population: pediatric, obstetric, and clinician-indirect home interventions.面向医疗保险人群的远程医疗:儿科、产科及临床医生间接居家干预措施
Evid Rep Technol Assess (Summ). 2001 Aug(24 Suppl):1-32.
6
The Swedish Council on Technology Assessment in Health Care (SBU) systematic overview of chemotherapy effects in some major tumour types--summary and conclusions.瑞典医疗技术评估委员会(SBU)对某些主要肿瘤类型化疗效果的系统综述——总结与结论
Acta Oncol. 2001;40(2-3):135-54. doi: 10.1080/02841860151116169.
7
Clinical cancer advances 2011: Annual Report on Progress Against Cancer from the American Society of Clinical Oncology.临床肿瘤进展 2011:美国临床肿瘤学会癌症进展年度报告。
J Clin Oncol. 2012 Jan 1;30(1):88-109. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2011.40.1919. Epub 2011 Dec 5.
8
[Volume and health outcomes: evidence from systematic reviews and from evaluation of Italian hospital data].[容量与健康结果:来自系统评价和意大利医院数据评估的证据]
Epidemiol Prev. 2013 Mar-Jun;37(2-3 Suppl 2):1-100.
9
Policy versus practice: comparison of prescribing therapy and durable medical equipment in medical and educational settings.政策与实践:医疗和教育环境中处方治疗与耐用医疗设备的比较
Pediatrics. 2004 Nov;114(5):e612-25. doi: 10.1542/peds.2004-1063.
10
American Society of Clinical Oncology policy statement: oversight of clinical research.美国临床肿瘤学会政策声明:临床研究监督
J Clin Oncol. 2003 Jun 15;21(12):2377-86. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2003.04.026. Epub 2003 Apr 29.

引用本文的文献

1
Measuring patient satisfaction for audit in general practice.衡量全科医疗中用于审计的患者满意度。
Qual Health Care. 1992 Sep;1(3):151-2. doi: 10.1136/qshc.1.3.151.
2
Uncertainty in medicine: can it be reduced?医学中的不确定性:它能被降低吗?
Qual Health Care. 1992 Sep;1(3):150-1. doi: 10.1136/qshc.1.3.150.