Suppr超能文献

国家注册中心的科学产出和影响:以骨科国家注册中心为例。

Scientific production and impact of national registers: the example of orthopaedic national registers.

机构信息

Orthopaedic Department, AP-HP (Assistance Publique des Hôpitaux de Paris), Hôpital Bichat-Claude Bernard, Paris, France.

出版信息

Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2011 Jul;19(7):858-63. doi: 10.1016/j.joca.2011.02.006. Epub 2011 Mar 15.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

National arthroplasty registers are often cited as examples of a non-randomized design that have made an essential contribution to advances in assessing arthroplasty procedures. We aimed to compare national registers to randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and meta-analyses in the field of arthroplasty in terms of scientific production and impact.

METHOD

We systematically searched Medline via PubMed and the registers' websites to select all articles from national registers, RCTs and meta-analyses assessing hip and knee arthroplasty. The scientific production and impact were evaluated by number of publications, number of citations (total and the 3-year citation counts), and information on the 2008 journal impact factor (IF), for each design and identified articles. We also contacted representatives of all the selected registers to determine the availability of the data for external research projects.

RESULTS

We retrieved information on 13 active national hip or knee arthroplasty registers; for 9, data were available for research projects under specific conditions. Overall, 190 publications in peer-reviewed journals resulted from national arthroplasty registers, 476 from RCTs, and 40 from meta-analyses. We found 4,112 citations for national register reports, 7,328 for RCT reports and 552 for meta-analysis reports. The median [interquartile [IQR] range] number of citations for register, RCT and meta-analysis reports in the 3-year period after publication was 3.5 [1.0-6.0], 2.0 [1.0-6.0], and 2.5 [0.5-7.5], respectively.

CONCLUSION

Publications from national registers may have the highest impact among the 3 designs in terms of median citation counts, but data from RCTs remain the most productive evidence in the arthroplasty field. Because of the number of patients recruited by registers, the quality of data collected, and the potential availability of data, scientific production and impact from national registers should be improved.

摘要

目的

国家关节置换登记处常被作为非随机设计的范例,对评估关节置换术的进展做出了重要贡献。我们旨在比较国家登记处与关节置换领域的随机对照试验(RCT)和荟萃分析在科学产出和影响方面的差异。

方法

我们通过 PubMed 中的 Medline 和登记处网站系统地检索了所有评估髋膝关节置换的国家登记处、RCT 和荟萃分析的文章。通过出版物数量、总引用次数(和 3 年引用次数)以及有关 2008 年期刊影响因子(IF)的信息,评估了每种设计和确定的文章的科学产出和影响。我们还联系了所有选定登记处的代表,以确定数据是否可用于外部研究项目。

结果

我们检索到 13 个活跃的国家髋或膝关节置换登记处的信息;对于其中 9 个登记处,在特定条件下可以获得用于研究项目的数据。总体而言,国家关节置换登记处产生了 190 篇同行评议期刊文章,RCT 产生了 476 篇,荟萃分析产生了 40 篇。我们为国家登记处报告找到了 4112 次引用,为 RCT 报告找到了 7328 次引用,为荟萃分析报告找到了 552 次引用。在发表后 3 年内,登记处、RCT 和荟萃分析报告的中位数(四分位距 [IQR]范围)引用次数分别为 3.5 [1.0-6.0]、2.0 [1.0-6.0]和 2.5 [0.5-7.5]。

结论

就中位数引用次数而言,国家登记处的出版物在 3 种设计中可能具有最高的影响力,但 RCT 数据仍然是关节置换领域最具生产力的证据。由于登记处招募的患者数量、收集数据的质量以及数据的潜在可用性,国家登记处的科学产出和影响力应该得到提高。

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