Suppr超能文献

[GRADE指南:8. 证据质量评级——间接性]

[GRADE guidelines: 8. Rating the quality of evidence - indirectness].

作者信息

Rasch Andrej, Perleth Matthias, Langer Gero, Meerpohl Joerg J, Gartlehner Gerald, Kaminski-Hartenthaler Angela, Schünemann Holger J

机构信息

Wissenschaftliches Institut der AOK (WIdO), Berlin.

出版信息

Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes. 2012;106(10):745-53. doi: 10.1016/j.zefq.2012.10.019. Epub 2012 Nov 16.

Abstract

Direct evidence comes from research that directly compares the interventions in which we are interested when applied to the populations in which we are interested and measures outcomes important to patients. Evidence can be indirect in one of four ways. First, patients may differ from those of interest (the term applicability is often used for this form of indirectness). Second, the intervention tested may differ from the intervention of interest. Decisions regarding indirectness of patients and interventions depend on an understanding of whether biological or social factors are sufficiently different that one might expect substantial differences in the magnitude of effect. Third, outcomes may differ from those of primary interest - for instance, surrogate outcomes that are not themselves important, but measured in the presumption that changes in the surrogate reflect changes in an outcome important to patients. A fourth type of indirectness, which is conceptually different from the first three, occurs when clinicians must choose between interventions that have not been tested in head to head comparisons. Making comparisons between treatments under these circumstances requires specific statistical methods and will be rated down in quality by one or two levels depending on the extent of differences between the patient populations, co-interventions, measurements of the outcome, and the methods of the trials of the candidate interventions against some other comparator.

摘要

直接证据来自于这样的研究

当将我们感兴趣的干预措施应用于我们感兴趣的人群时,直接对这些干预措施进行比较,并衡量对患者重要的结果。证据可能以四种方式之一是间接的。首先,患者可能与感兴趣的患者不同(这种间接形式通常使用“适用性”一词)。其次,所测试的干预措施可能与感兴趣的干预措施不同。关于患者和干预措施间接性的决策取决于对生物或社会因素是否足够不同的理解,以至于人们可能预期效果大小会有实质性差异。第三,结果可能与主要感兴趣的结果不同——例如,替代结果本身并不重要,但在假设替代结果的变化反映对患者重要的结果的变化的情况下进行测量。第四种间接性类型,在概念上与前三种不同,当临床医生必须在未经直接比较测试的干预措施之间进行选择时就会出现。在这些情况下进行治疗比较需要特定的统计方法,并且根据患者群体、共同干预措施、结果测量以及候选干预措施与其他对照进行试验的方法之间的差异程度,质量会被降低一到两个等级。

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