Suppr超能文献

发表于高影响力护理期刊的系统评价的方法学质量:文献综述

The methodological quality of systematic reviews published in high-impact nursing journals: a review of the literature.

作者信息

Pölkki Tarja, Kanste Outi, Kääriäinen Maria, Elo Satu, Kyngäs Helvi

机构信息

Institute of Health Sciences, University of Oulu, Oulu, Finland.

出版信息

J Clin Nurs. 2014 Feb;23(3-4):315-32. doi: 10.1111/jocn.12132. Epub 2013 Mar 13.

Abstract

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

To analyse systematic review articles published in the top 10 nursing journals to determine the quality of the methods employed within them.

BACKGROUND

Systematic review is defined as a scientific research method that synthesises high-quality scientific knowledge on a given topic. The number of such reviews in nursing science has increased dramatically during recent years, but their methodological quality has not previously been assessed.

DESIGN

A review of the literature using a narrative approach.

METHODS

Ranked impact factor scores for nursing journals were obtained from the Journal Citation Report database of the Institute of Scientific Information (ISI Web of Knowledge). All issues from the years 2009 and 2010 of the top 10 ranked journals were included. CINAHL and MEDLINE databases were searched to locate studies using the search terms 'systematic review' and 'systematic literature review'. A total of 39 eligible studies were identified. Their methodological quality was evaluated through the specific criteria of quality assessment, description of synthesis and strengths and weaknesses reported in the included studies.

RESULTS

Most of the eligible systematic reviews included several different designs or types of quantitative study. The majority included a quality assessment, and a total of 17 different criteria were identified. The method of synthesis was mentioned in about half of the reviews, the most common being narrative synthesis. The weaknesses of reviews were discussed, while strengths were rarely highlighted.

CONCLUSION

The methodological quality of the systematic reviews examined varied considerably, although they were all published in nursing journals with a high-impact factor.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

Despite the fact that systematic reviews are considered the most robust source of research evidence, they vary in methodological quality. This point is important to consider in clinical practice when applying the results to patient care.

摘要

目的

分析发表在排名前十的护理期刊上的系统评价文章,以确定其中所采用方法的质量。

背景

系统评价被定义为一种科学研究方法,它综合了关于某一特定主题的高质量科学知识。近年来,护理科学领域此类评价的数量急剧增加,但此前尚未对其方法学质量进行评估。

设计

采用叙述性方法对文献进行综述。

方法

从科学信息研究所(ISI 科学网)的期刊引证报告数据库中获取护理期刊的影响因子排名得分。纳入排名前十的期刊2009年和2010年的所有期。通过检索CINAHL和MEDLINE数据库,使用检索词“系统评价”和“系统文献综述”来查找研究。共确定了39项符合条件的研究。通过质量评估的具体标准、纳入研究中报告的综合描述以及优缺点来评估其方法学质量。

结果

大多数符合条件的系统评价包括几种不同的设计或定量研究类型。大多数都进行了质量评估,共确定了17条不同的标准。约一半的综述提到了综合方法,最常见的是叙述性综合。讨论了综述的缺点,而优点很少被突出强调。

结论

尽管所审查的系统评价均发表在具有高影响因子的护理期刊上,但其方法学质量差异很大。

与临床实践的相关性

尽管系统评价被认为是最可靠的研究证据来源,但其方法学质量各不相同。在临床实践中将结果应用于患者护理时,这一点很重要。

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