• 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

Communicating with decision-makers through evidence reviews.

作者信息

Pettman T L, Hall B J, Waters E, de Silva-Sanigorski A, Armstrong R, Doyle J

机构信息

Jack Brockhoff Child Health and Wellbeing Program and Cochrane Public Health Group, Melbourne School of Population Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.

出版信息

J Public Health (Oxf). 2011 Dec;33(4):630-3. doi: 10.1093/pubmed/fdr092.

DOI:10.1093/pubmed/fdr092
PMID:22096110
Abstract
摘要

相似文献

1
Communicating with decision-makers through evidence reviews.通过证据综述与决策者沟通。
J Public Health (Oxf). 2011 Dec;33(4):630-3. doi: 10.1093/pubmed/fdr092.
2
Tracking and understanding the utility of Cochrane reviews for public health decision-making.追踪并理解Cochrane系统评价在公共卫生决策中的效用。
J Public Health (Oxf). 2012 Jun;34(2):309-13. doi: 10.1093/pubmed/fds038.
3
Evidence-based decision-making: practical issues in the appraisal of evidence to inform policy and practice.循证决策：评估证据以指导政策和实践中的实际问题。
Aust Health Rev. 2010 Nov;34(4):435-40. doi: 10.1071/AH09778.
4
Evidence-based practice: how to perform and use systematic reviews for clinical decision-making.循证实践：如何进行和使用系统评价进行临床决策。
Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2010 Sep;27(9):763-72. doi: 10.1097/EJA.0b013e32833a560a.
5
Systematic reviews for evidence-based management: how to find them and what to do with them.基于循证管理的系统评价：如何查找以及如何运用它们。
Am J Manag Care. 2004 Nov;10(11 Pt 1):806-12.
6
Comment to "why are Cochrane hepato-biliary reviews undervalued by physicians as an aid for clinical decision making?".对“为何Cochrane肝胆病综述在临床决策辅助方面未得到医生的充分重视？”的评论
Dig Liver Dis. 2010 Oct;42(10):746; author reply 746-7. doi: 10.1016/j.dld.2010.02.009. Epub 2010 Mar 27.
7
Factors of the innovation, organization, environment, and individual that predict the influence five systematic reviews had on public health decisions.创新、组织、环境和个体等因素，这些因素预测了五项系统评价对公共卫生决策的影响。
Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2001 Fall;17(4):467-78.
8
Knowledge synthesis, translation and exchange in public health and health promotion: the role of a Cochrane Review Group.公共卫生与健康促进中的知识整合、转化与交流：考克兰协作网评价小组的作用
Promot Educ. 2007;14(1):34-5.
9
[Systematic reviews, an update].[系统评价，更新版]
Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd. 2009 May 2;153(18):866-9.
10
[Communicating about risks to public health].[关于公共卫生风险的沟通]
Med Trop (Mars). 2004;64(6):626-8.

引用本文的文献

1
COVID-19 Pandemic Risk Assessment: Systematic Review.2019冠状病毒病大流行风险评估：系统综述
Risk Manag Healthc Policy. 2024 Apr 11;17:903-925. doi: 10.2147/RMHP.S444494. eCollection 2024.
2
A meta-review of psychological resilience during COVID-19.关于新冠疫情期间心理韧性的元综述。
Npj Ment Health Res. 2022;1(1):5. doi: 10.1038/s44184-022-00005-8. Epub 2022 Jul 5.
3
Accessing evidence to inform public health policy: a study to enhance advocacy.获取用于为公共卫生政策提供信息的证据：一项加强宣传的研究
Public Health. 2015 Jun;129(6):698-704. doi: 10.1016/j.puhe.2015.02.016. Epub 2015 Mar 18.
4
Understanding administrative evidence-based practices: findings from a survey of local health department leaders.理解行政循证实践：来自地方卫生部门领导调查的结果。
Am J Prev Med. 2014 Jan;46(1):49-57. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2013.08.013.
5
Improving utility of evidence synthesis for healthy public policy: the three Rs (relevance, rigor, and readability [and resources]).提高健康公共政策证据综合的效用：三 R（相关性、严谨性和可读性[和资源]）。
Am J Public Health. 2013 Aug;103(8):e17-23. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2013.301400. Epub 2013 Jun 13.