• 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

循证医学与证据等级

Evidence-based medicine and levels of evidence.

作者信息

Wallace David K

机构信息

Department of Ophthalmology, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina, USA.

出版信息

Am Orthopt J. 2010;60:2-5. doi: 10.3368/aoj.60.1.2.

DOI:10.3368/aoj.60.1.2
PMID:21061876
Abstract

Evidence-based medicine is the practice of making medical decisions based on evidence gained from applying the scientific method. Published studies are evaluated using three key questions: "Are the results valid?"; "What are the results?"; and "Can the results be applied to my patients?" The hierarchy of study methods for obtaining evidence is, in order from least to most useful: laboratory research, editorials, case reports and series, case-control studies, cohort studies, and randomized clinical trials. Retrospective case series can suffer from problems such as selection of a biased sample, mixing of treatment effects, and lack of control group. Randomized clinical trials (and meta-analyses of multiple trials) provide the highest level of evidence because randomization limits confounding and prevents bias of treatment assignment. In addition, randomized trials have standardization of interventions, prospective data collection, and masked outcome measures. Although every question cannot be addressed by a randomized clinical trial, the best available evidence should be sought and used to guide treatments.

摘要

循证医学是基于应用科学方法所获得的证据来做出医疗决策的实践。已发表的研究通过三个关键问题进行评估:“结果有效吗?”;“结果是什么?”;以及“结果能应用于我的患者吗?”获取证据的研究方法层次结构,从最没用的到最有用的依次为:实验室研究、社论、病例报告及系列、病例对照研究、队列研究和随机临床试验。回顾性病例系列可能存在诸如选择有偏差的样本、治疗效果混淆以及缺乏对照组等问题。随机临床试验(以及多个试验的荟萃分析)提供最高级别的证据,因为随机化限制了混杂因素并防止治疗分配产生偏差。此外,随机试验具有干预措施的标准化、前瞻性数据收集和盲法结局测量。尽管并非每个问题都能通过随机临床试验来解决,但应寻求并使用最佳可得证据来指导治疗。

相似文献

1
Evidence-based medicine and levels of evidence.循证医学与证据等级
Am Orthopt J. 2010;60:2-5. doi: 10.3368/aoj.60.1.2.
2
Evidence-based medicine is very hot.循证医学非常热门。
Am Orthopt J. 2010;60:viii. doi: 10.3368/aoj.60.1.viii.
3
Ethical pitfalls in neonatal comparative effectiveness trials.新生儿比较疗效试验中的伦理陷阱。
Neonatology. 2014;105(4):350-1. doi: 10.1159/000360650. Epub 2014 May 30.
4
Evidence-based medicine, systematic reviews, and guidelines in interventional pain management: Part 2: Randomized controlled trials.基于证据的医学、系统评价以及介入性疼痛管理指南:第2部分:随机对照试验
Pain Physician. 2008 Nov-Dec;11(6):717-73.
5
Evidence-based mucogingival therapy. Part 2: Ordinary and individual patient data meta-analyses of surgical treatment of recession using complete root coverage as the outcome variable.循证性龈黏膜治疗。第2部分:以完全根面覆盖为结果变量的牙龈退缩手术治疗的普通和个体患者数据荟萃分析。
J Periodontol. 2003 May;74(5):741-56. doi: 10.1902/jop.2003.74.5.741.
6
The evolution of the randomized controlled trial and its role in evidence-based decision making.随机对照试验的演变及其在循证决策中的作用。
J Intern Med. 2003 Aug;254(2):105-13. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2796.2003.01201.x.
7
Evidence-based practice of transfusion medicine: is it possible and what do the words mean?输血医学的循证实践:这可行吗?这些词又是什么意思?
Transfus Med Rev. 2004 Oct;18(4):267-78. doi: 10.1016/j.tmrv.2004.06.003.
8
9
Study design and hierarchy of evidence for surgical decision making.手术决策的研究设计与证据等级
Clin Plast Surg. 2008 Apr;35(2):195-205. doi: 10.1016/j.cps.2007.10.007.
10
Problems in the "evidence" of "evidence-based medicine".“循证医学”之“证据”中的问题。
Am J Med. 1997 Dec;103(6):529-35. doi: 10.1016/s0002-9343(97)00244-1.

引用本文的文献

1
How Well Do Studies of Mesenchymal Stem Cell Intervention and Knee Osteoarthritis Adhere to the Minimum Information for Studies Evaluating Biologics Guidelines? A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials.间充质干细胞干预与膝关节骨关节炎的研究在多大程度上符合评估生物制品指南的研究最低信息要求?一项随机对照试验的系统评价。
HSS J. 2024 Nov;20(4):544-549. doi: 10.1177/15563316231200496. Epub 2023 Sep 26.
2
A Systematic Review on Clinical and Health-Related Quality of Life Outcomes following Total Gastrectomy in Patients with Hereditary Diffuse Gastric Cancer.遗传性弥漫性胃癌患者全胃切除术后临床及健康相关生活质量结局的系统评价
Cancers (Basel). 2024 Jan 23;16(3):473. doi: 10.3390/cancers16030473.
3
Is Burning Mouth Syndrome Associated with Extraoral Dryness? A Systematic Review.
灼口综合征与口外干燥有关吗?一项系统评价。
J Clin Med. 2023 Oct 14;12(20):6525. doi: 10.3390/jcm12206525.
4
A new pathway for considering trigger factors based on parallel-serial connection models and displaying the relationships of causal factors in low-probability events.基于并串联连接模型考虑触发因素的新途径,并显示低概率事件中因果因素的关系。
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2023 Apr 15;23(1):93. doi: 10.1186/s12874-023-01919-3.
5
Need for discriminating between diagnostic and screening efficacy to estimate a biomarker based on case control and cohort studies.需要区分基于病例对照和队列研究的诊断和筛查功效来评估生物标志物。
Sci Rep. 2021 Nov 17;11(1):22450. doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-01904-0.
6
Comments on "Sensory Outcomes in Digital Nerve Repair Techniques: An Updated Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review".对《数字神经修复技术中的感觉结果:更新的荟萃分析与系统评价》的评论
Hand (N Y). 2020 Nov;15(6):884-885. doi: 10.1177/1558944720957742. Epub 2020 Sep 16.
7
Analyzing the Relationship between Cohort and Case-Control Study Results Based on Model for Multiple Pathogenic Factors.基于多病因模型分析队列研究和病例对照研究结果的关系
Comput Math Methods Med. 2019 Dec 30;2019:7507043. doi: 10.1155/2019/7507043. eCollection 2019.
8
Safety and efficacy of en bloc transurethral resection versus conventional transurethral resection for primary nonmuscle-invasive bladder cancer: a meta-analysis.整块经尿道切除术与传统经尿道切除术治疗原发性非肌肉浸润性膀胱癌的安全性和有效性的荟萃分析。
World J Surg Oncol. 2020 Jan 4;18(1):4. doi: 10.1186/s12957-019-1776-4.
9
A manual corpus of annotated main findings of clinical case reports.一份标注了临床病例报告主要发现的人工语料库。
Database (Oxford). 2019 Jan 1;2019:bay143. doi: 10.1093/database/bay143.