• 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

相似文献

1
Helping people make well-informed decisions about health care: old and new challenges to achieving the aim of the Cochrane Collaboration.帮助人们在医疗保健方面做出明智的决策:实现Cochrane协作网目标面临的新老挑战。
Syst Rev. 2013 Sep 20;2:77. doi: 10.1186/2046-4053-2-77.
2
The future of Cochrane Neonatal.考克兰新生儿协作网的未来。
Early Hum Dev. 2020 Nov;150:105191. doi: 10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2020.105191. Epub 2020 Sep 12.
3
The Cochrane Collaboration--advances and challenges in improving evidence-based decision making.考克兰协作网——改善循证决策的进展与挑战
Med Decis Making. 1998 Jan-Mar;18(1):2-9; discussion 16-8. doi: 10.1177/0272989X9801800102.
4
The Cochrane Collaboration.考克兰协作网
Eur J Clin Nutr. 2005 Aug;59 Suppl 1:S147-9; discussion S195-6. doi: 10.1038/sj.ejcn.1602188.
5
Research synthesis and dissemination as a bridge to knowledge management: the Cochrane Collaboration.作为知识管理桥梁的研究综合与传播:考克兰协作网
Bull World Health Organ. 2004 Oct;82(10):778-83.
6
[Present status and perspectives in international cooperation in the Cochrane Collaboration].[Cochrane协作网国际合作的现状与展望]
Sb Lek. 1998;99(4):601-7.
7
International activity in the Cochrane Collaboration with particular reference to India.Cochrane协作网的国际活动,特别提及印度。
Natl Med J India. 2007 Sep-Oct;20(5):250-5.
8
Evidence-based medicine for consumers: a role for the Cochrane Collaboration.面向消费者的循证医学:Cochrane协作网的作用。
J Med Libr Assoc. 2002 Apr;90(2):218-22.
9
Knowledge for knowledge translation: the role of the Cochrane Collaboration.知识转化的知识:Cochrane协作网的作用。
J Contin Educ Health Prof. 2006 Winter;26(1):55-62. doi: 10.1002/chp.51.
10
Mapping the Cochrane evidence for decision making in health care.绘制Cochrane证据以辅助医疗保健决策。
J Eval Clin Pract. 2007 Aug;13(4):689-92. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2007.00886.x.

引用本文的文献

1
Supporting implementation of Cochrane methods in complex communication reviews: resources developed and lessons learned for editorial practice and policy.支持在复杂的沟通综述中实施考科蓝方法:为编辑实践和政策制定而开发的资源及经验教训。
Health Res Policy Syst. 2019 Mar 28;17(1):32. doi: 10.1186/s12961-019-0435-0.
2
What role does performance information play in securing improvement in healthcare? a conceptual framework for levers of change.绩效信息在确保医疗保健改善方面发挥着什么作用?变革杠杆的概念框架。
BMJ Open. 2017 Aug 28;7(8):e014825. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-014825.

本文引用的文献

1
Nonrandomized studies are not always found even when selection criteria for health systems intervention reviews include them: a methodological study.即使在健康系统干预措施综述的选择标准包括非随机研究时,也不一定能找到这些研究:一项方法学研究。
J Clin Epidemiol. 2013 Apr;66(4):367-70. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2012.11.009. Epub 2013 Feb 4.
2
The automation of systematic reviews.系统评价的自动化
BMJ. 2013 Jan 10;346:f139. doi: 10.1136/bmj.f139.
3
The Cochrane Collaboration review prioritization projects show that a variety of approaches successfully identify high-priority topics.考科蓝协作组织的综述优先排序项目表明,多种方法都能成功识别出高度优先的主题。
J Clin Epidemiol. 2013 May;66(5):472-3. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2012.03.015. Epub 2012 Sep 5.
4
Two methods provide similar signals for the need to update systematic reviews.两种方法为系统评价更新提供了相似的信号。
J Clin Epidemiol. 2012 Jun;65(6):660-8. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2011.12.004. Epub 2012 Mar 29.
5
Subgroup analyses.亚组分析。
BMJ. 2012 Mar 15;344:e2022. doi: 10.1136/bmj.e2022.
6
Study-design selection criteria in systematic reviews of effectiveness of health systems interventions and reforms: A meta-review.系统评价卫生系统干预和改革效果的研究设计选择标准:荟萃分析。
Health Policy. 2012 Mar;104(3):206-14. doi: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2011.12.007. Epub 2012 Feb 10.
7
Rethinking credible evidence synthesis.重新思考可靠的证据综合分析。
BMJ. 2012 Jan 17;344:d7898. doi: 10.1136/bmj.d7898.
8
Establishing a minimum dataset for prospective registration of systematic reviews: an international consultation.建立系统评价前瞻性注册的最小数据集:国际咨询。
PLoS One. 2011;6(11):e27319. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0027319. Epub 2011 Nov 16.
9
The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials.Cochrane 协作网评估随机试验偏倚风险的工具。
BMJ. 2011 Oct 18;343:d5928. doi: 10.1136/bmj.d5928.
10
Meta-analyses of adverse effects data derived from randomised controlled trials as compared to observational studies: methodological overview.随机对照试验与观察性研究中不良反应数据的荟萃分析:方法学概述。
PLoS Med. 2011 May;8(5):e1001026. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001026. Epub 2011 May 3.

帮助人们在医疗保健方面做出明智的决策:实现Cochrane协作网目标面临的新老挑战。

Helping people make well-informed decisions about health care: old and new challenges to achieving the aim of the Cochrane Collaboration.

作者信息

Oxman Andrew D

机构信息

Global Health Unit, Norwegian Knowledge Centre for the Health Services, St Olavs plass, PO Box 7004, Oslo N-0130, Norway.

出版信息

Syst Rev. 2013 Sep 20;2:77. doi: 10.1186/2046-4053-2-77.

DOI:10.1186/2046-4053-2-77
PMID:24050439
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3848654/
Abstract

The aim of the Cochrane Collaboration is to help people make well-informed decisions about health care by preparing, maintaining and promoting the accessibility of systematic reviews of the effects of health care interventions. This aim is as relevant now as it was 20 years ago, when the Cochrane Collaboration was established. Substantial progress has been made toward addressing challenges to achieving the Collaboration's aim. At the same time, a huge amount of work remains to be done. Current challenges include improving the quality of reviews, methodological challenges, meeting the needs of contributors and users and taking on new challenges while staying focused on the Collaboration's aim. Radical thinking and substantial change may be needed to identify and implement pragmatic strategies to ensure that reviews are up-to-date and informative. Methodological challenges include the development and application of better methods for addressing explanatory factors, incorporating non-randomized evidence and making comparisons across multiple interventions. Innovations in editorial processes and strategies to meet the needs of low- and middle-income countries and diverse users of Cochrane reviews are needed. Finally, although it is important to consider broadening the aims of the Collaboration to include types of questions other than the effects of interventions and types of products other than the Cochrane Library, we should not lose sight of the aim of the Cochrane Collaboration. Addressing that aim is still a major challenge that requires the collaboration of thousands of people around the world and continuing improvements in the methods used to achieve that aim.

摘要

考克兰协作网的目标是,通过编写、维护和促进获取有关医疗保健干预措施效果的系统评价,帮助人们在医疗保健方面做出明智的决策。这一目标如今与20年前考克兰协作网成立时一样重要。在应对实现协作网目标所面临的挑战方面已取得了重大进展。与此同时,仍有大量工作有待完成。当前的挑战包括提高评价质量、方法学挑战、满足贡献者和使用者的需求,以及在专注于协作网目标的同时应对新的挑战。可能需要进行激进的思考和重大变革,以确定和实施务实的策略,确保评价与时俱进且信息丰富。方法学挑战包括开发和应用更好的方法来处理解释性因素、纳入非随机证据以及对多种干预措施进行比较。需要在编辑流程和策略方面进行创新,以满足低收入和中等收入国家以及考克兰评价的不同使用者的需求。最后,尽管考虑扩大协作网的目标,将干预措施效果以外的问题类型和考克兰图书馆以外的产品类型包括在内很重要,但我们不应忽视考克兰协作网的目标。实现这一目标仍然是一项重大挑战,需要全世界数千人的协作以及用于实现该目标的方法的持续改进。