Suppr超能文献

我们在阅读什么?对 1999 年至 2008 年正畸文献的分析。

What are we reading? An analysis of the orthodontic literature 1999 to 2008.

机构信息

Liverpool University Dental Hospital, United Kingdom.

出版信息

Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2011 May;139(5):e471-84. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2010.07.023.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this study was to assess differences between articles published in the American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics (AJO-DO), the Angle Orthodontist (AO), the European Journal of Orthodontics (EJO), and the Journal of Orthodontics (JO) from 1999 to 2008.

METHODS

All journals were hand-searched and 4301 eligible articles were identified. A random sample of 425 articles was obtained to provide 80% power to detect a 100% increase in the number of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) at the 5% level of significance. Each article was classified according to predetermined criteria. Variations between journals were assessed using the χ(2) test or odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI).

RESULTS

The AJO-DO published 45.6% of the articles in the final sample, 27.7% were from the AO, 17.4% were from the EJO, and 9.2% were from the JO. Statistically significant differences were found between the type (P <0.001), subject (P <0.001), setting (P <0.03), and method (P <0.001) of articles published in the 4 journals. The increase in the proportion of RCTs published between 1999 and 2003 and 2004 to 2008 was not statistically significant (OR 0.64; 95% CI, 0.29, 1.43).

CONCLUSIONS

Statistically significant differences were found in the publication profiles of the 4 orthodontic journals examined, but the increase in RCTs was lower than anticipated.

摘要

简介

本研究的目的是评估 1999 年至 2008 年间发表于《美国口腔正畸学和颌面正畸学杂志》(AJO-DO)、《Angle 正畸学杂志》(AO)、《欧洲正畸学杂志》(EJO)和《正畸杂志》(JO)的文章之间的差异。

方法

所有期刊均进行人工检索,共确定 4301 篇符合条件的文章。随机抽取 425 篇文章,以 80%的功效在 5%的显著性水平上检测随机对照试验(RCT)数量增加 100%。根据预定标准对每篇文章进行分类。使用 χ(2)检验或比值比(OR)和 95%置信区间(95%CI)评估期刊之间的差异。

结果

AJO-DO 在最终样本中发表了 45.6%的文章,AO 发表了 27.7%,EJO 发表了 17.4%,JO 发表了 9.2%。在 4 种期刊上发表的文章的类型(P <0.001)、主题(P <0.001)、环境(P <0.03)和方法(P <0.001)存在统计学显著差异。1999 年至 2003 年与 2004 年至 2008 年期间发表的 RCT 比例增加不具有统计学意义(OR 0.64;95%CI,0.29,1.43)。

结论

在所检查的 4 种正畸期刊的出版概况中发现了统计学显著差异,但 RCT 的增加低于预期。

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