Suppr超能文献

印度的结果研究资源:现状、需求与未来方向。

Outcomes research resources in India: current status, need and way forward.

作者信息

Shah Jatin, Pawaskar Akshay, Kumar Smit, Kshirsagar Nilima

机构信息

Maharashtra University of Health Sciences, Nashik, Maharashtra India.

出版信息

Springerplus. 2013 Oct 7;2:518. doi: 10.1186/2193-1801-2-518. eCollection 2013.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Despite their importance, the number of outcomes research studies conducted in India are lesser than other countries. Information about the distribution of existing outcomes research resources and relevant expertise can benefit researchers and research groups interested in conducting outcomes research studies and policy makers interested in funding outcomes research studies in India. We have reviewed the literature to identify and map resources described in outcomes research studies conducted in India.

METHODS

We reviewed the following online biomedical databases: Pubmed, SCIRUS, CINAHL, and Google scholar and selected articles that met the following criteria: published in English, conducted on Indian population, providing information about outcomes research resources (databases/registries/electronic medical records/electronic healthcare records/hospital information systems) in India and articles describing outcomes research studies or epidemiological studies based on outcomes research resources. After shortlisting articles, we abstracted data into three datasets viz. 1. Resource dataset, 2. Bibliometric dataset and 3. Researcher dataset and carried out descriptive analysis.

RESULTS

Of the 126 articles retrieved, 119 articles were selected for inclusion in the study. The tally increased to 133 articles after a secondary search. Based on the information available in the articles, we identified a total of 91 unique research resources. We observed that most of the resources were Registries (62/91) and Databases ( 23/91) and were primarily located in Maharashtra (19/91) followed by Tamil Nadu (11/91), Chandigarh (8/91) and Kerala (7/91) States. These resources primarily collected data on Cancer (44/91), Stroke (5/91) and Diabetes (4/91). Most of these resources were Institutional (38/91) and Regional resources (35/91) located in Government owned and managed Academic Institutes/Hospitals (57/91) or Privately owned and managed non - Academic Institutes/Hospitals (14/91). Data from the Population based Cancer Registry, Mumbai was used in 41 peer reviewed publications followed by Population based Cancer Registry, Chennai (17) and Rural Cancer Registry Barshi (14). Most of the articles were published in International journals (139/193) that had an impact factor of 0-1.99 (43/91) and received an average of 0-20 citations (55/91). We identified 193 researchers who are mainly located in Maharashtra (37/193) and Tamil Nadu (24/193) states and Southern (76/193) and Western zones (47/193). They were mainly affiliated to Government owned & managed Academic Institutes /Hospitals (96/193) or privately owned and managed Academic Institutes/ Hospitals (35/193).

CONCLUSIONS

Given the importance of Outcomes research, relevant resources should be supported and encouraged which would help in the generation of important healthcare data that can guide health and research policy. Clarity about the distribution of outcomes research resources can facilitate future resource and funding allocation decisions for policy makers as well as help them measure research performance over time.

摘要

背景

尽管成果研究很重要,但在印度开展的成果研究数量少于其他国家。了解现有成果研究资源和相关专业知识的分布情况,有助于有意在印度开展成果研究的研究人员和研究团队,以及有意为印度成果研究提供资金的政策制定者。我们回顾了相关文献,以识别和梳理印度开展的成果研究中描述的资源。

方法

我们检索了以下在线生物医学数据库:PubMed、SCIRUS、CINAHL和谷歌学术,并筛选出符合以下标准的文章:英文发表、针对印度人群开展、提供有关印度成果研究资源(数据库/注册库/电子病历/电子健康记录/医院信息系统)的信息,以及描述基于成果研究资源的成果研究或流行病学研究的文章。筛选出文章后,我们将数据提取到三个数据集,即1. 资源数据集、2. 文献计量数据集和3. 研究人员数据集,并进行描述性分析。

结果

在检索到的126篇文章中,119篇被选入研究。二次检索后,文章总数增至133篇。根据文章中的信息,我们共识别出91个独特的研究资源。我们发现,大多数资源是注册库(62/91)和数据库(23/91),主要位于马哈拉施特拉邦(19/91),其次是泰米尔纳德邦(11/91)、昌迪加尔(8/91)和喀拉拉邦(7/91)。这些资源主要收集癌症(44/91)、中风(5/91)和糖尿病(4/91)的数据。这些资源大多是机构性(38/91)和区域性资源(35/91),位于政府所有和管理的学术机构/医院(57/91)或私人所有和管理的非学术机构/医院(14/91)。孟买基于人群的癌症注册库的数据被用于41篇同行评议出版物,其次是金奈基于人群的癌症注册库(17篇)和巴尔希农村癌症注册库(14篇)。大多数文章发表在国际期刊上(139/193),影响因子为0 - 1.99(43/91),平均被引次数为0 - 20次(55/91)。我们识别出193名研究人员,他们主要位于马哈拉施特拉邦(37/193)和泰米尔纳德邦(24/193)以及南部(76/193)和西部区域(47/193)。他们主要隶属于政府所有和管理的学术机构/医院(96/193)或私人所有和管理的学术机构/医院(35/193)。

结论

鉴于成果研究的重要性,应支持和鼓励相关资源,这将有助于生成重要的医疗保健数据,为卫生和研究政策提供指导。明确成果研究资源的分布情况,有助于政策制定者未来进行资源和资金分配决策,也有助于他们衡量长期的研究绩效。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3bd3/3804670/a326722de8e9/40064_2013_588_Fig1_HTML.jpg

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