Swanson Eric
Swanson Center, Leawood, Kans.
Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2013 Dec 6;1(8):e66. doi: 10.1097/GOX.0000000000000001. eCollection 2013 Nov.
The Level of Evidence rating was introduced in 2011 to grade the quality of publications. This system evaluates study design but does not assess several other quality indicators. This study introduces a new "Cosmetic Level of Evidence And Recommendation" (CLEAR) classification that includes additional methodological criteria and compares this new classification with the existing system.
All rated publications in the Cosmetic Section of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, July 2011 through June 2013, were evaluated. The published Level of Evidence rating (1-5) and criteria relevant to study design and methodology for each study were tabulated. A new CLEAR rating was assigned to each article, including a recommendation grade (A-D). The published Level of Evidence rating (1-5) was compared with the recommendation grade determined using the CLEAR classification.
Among the 87 cosmetic articles, 48 studies (55%) were designated as level 4. Three articles were assigned a level 1, but they contained deficiencies sufficient to undermine the conclusions. The correlation between the published Level of Evidence classification (1-5) and CLEAR Grade (A-D) was weak (ρ = 0.11, not significant). Only 41 studies (48%) evaluated consecutive patients or consecutive patients meeting inclusion criteria.
The CLEAR classification considers methodological factors in evaluating study reliability. A prospective study among consecutive patients meeting eligibility criteria, with a reported inclusion rate, the use of contemporaneous controls when indicated, and consideration of confounders is a realistic goal. Such measures are likely to improve study quality.
证据等级评定于2011年引入,用于对出版物质量进行分级。该系统评估研究设计,但未评估其他几个质量指标。本研究引入了一种新的“美容证据与推荐等级”(CLEAR)分类,其中包括额外的方法学标准,并将这种新分类与现有系统进行比较。
对2011年7月至2013年6月《整形与重建外科》美容板块中所有评级的出版物进行评估。将已发表的证据等级评定(1 - 5级)以及与每项研究的研究设计和方法相关的标准制成表格。为每篇文章赋予一个新的CLEAR评级,包括推荐等级(A - D)。将已发表的证据等级评定(1 - 5级)与使用CLEAR分类确定的推荐等级进行比较。
在87篇美容文章中,48项研究(55%)被指定为4级。3篇文章被评定为1级,但它们存在足以削弱结论的缺陷。已发表的证据等级分类(1 - 5级)与CLEAR等级(A - D)之间的相关性较弱(ρ = 0.11,无统计学意义)。只有41项研究(48%)评估了连续患者或符合纳入标准的连续患者。
CLEAR分类在评估研究可靠性时考虑了方法学因素。对符合入选标准的连续患者进行前瞻性研究,并报告纳入率,在有指征时使用同期对照,并考虑混杂因素是一个现实目标。这些措施可能会提高研究质量。