Suppr超能文献

一种评估医学文献在临床实践中的价值和适用性的便捷公式的开发与验证。

Development and validation of a convenient formula evaluating the value and applicability of medical literature in clinical practice.

作者信息

Mok Hsiao-Pei, Zhou Ying, Chen Jun-Ru, Gao Qiang

机构信息

Hsiao-Pei Mok, West China Medical School, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan 610041, China.

Ying Zhou, West China Medical School, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan 610041, China.

出版信息

Pak J Med Sci. 2014 Nov-Dec;30(6):1377-82. doi: 10.12669/pjms.306.5450.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

Evidence-based medicine offers explicit methods to evaluate the evidence grades of literature. However, evidence grades do not meet all the practical needs of physicians. This study is aimed to develop a convenient method for evaluating the clinical value of medical literature from the perspective of the clinician.

METHODS

A literature applicability equation was formulated through the Delphi method and the analytic hierarchy process. A consistency check was used to ascertain the efficacy of the formula. Three senior clinicians assessed 30 articles based on their clinical experiences and subjective opinions, while one independent researcher performed independent assessments of the applicability of 30 articles using the evaluation formula.

RESULTS

The literature applicability equation was Y = 3.93X1 + 11.78X2 + 14.83X3 + 44.53X4 + 24.93X5, where Y = literature applicability, X1 = years since publication, X2 = target question covered or not, X3 = sample size, X4 = study type, and X5 = journal quality. Consistency index (CI) values for the first-level indicator ("literature applicability") and the second-level indicators ("pertinence and timeliness" and "quality of results") were 0.0325, 0.0012, and 0.0001, respectively. The weights used to calculate the matrix indicators had satisfactory accordance (random coincidence coefficient = 0.056). A consistency check for the efficacy of the formula revealed kappa = 0.749 and P < .001. Conclusion : The developed and validated literature applicability evaluation formula may be a useful and convenient tool for identifying clinically valuable medical literature.

摘要

目的

循证医学提供了明确的方法来评估文献的证据等级。然而,证据等级并不能满足医生所有的实际需求。本研究旨在从临床医生的角度开发一种评估医学文献临床价值的便捷方法。

方法

通过德尔菲法和层次分析法制定文献适用性方程。采用一致性检验来确定该公式的有效性。三位资深临床医生根据他们的临床经验和主观意见评估30篇文章,而一位独立研究人员使用评估公式对30篇文章的适用性进行独立评估。

结果

文献适用性方程为Y = 3.93X1 + 11.78X2 + 14.83X3 + 44.53X4 + 24.93X5,其中Y =文献适用性, X1 =发表年份, X2 =是否涵盖目标问题, X3 =样本量, X4 =研究类型, X5 =期刊质量。一级指标(“文献适用性”)和二级指标(“相关性和及时性”以及“结果质量”)的一致性指数(CI)值分别为0.0325、0.0012和0.0001。用于计算矩阵指标的权重具有满意的一致性(随机一致性系数 = 0.056)。对该公式有效性的一致性检验显示kappa = 0.749且P <.001。结论:所开发并经验证的文献适用性评估公式可能是识别具有临床价值的医学文献的有用且便捷的工具。

相似文献

6
Checklist for clinical applicability of subgroup analysis.亚组分析临床适用性检查表。
J Clin Pharm Ther. 2020 Jun;45(3):530-538. doi: 10.1111/jcpt.13102. Epub 2019 Dec 18.

本文引用的文献

2
Evidence-based medicine?!... What for?循证医学?!……为了什么?
Rev Gastroenterol Mex. 2012 Oct-Dec;77(4):157-8. doi: 10.1016/j.rgmx.2012.09.001. Epub 2012 Nov 8.
3
[Sample size calculation in randomized trials: what the clinician needs to know].
Gynecol Obstet Fertil. 2012 Oct;40(10):629-30. doi: 10.1016/j.gyobfe.2012.08.001. Epub 2012 Sep 18.
6
Evidence-based medicine: promise and pitfalls.循证医学:前景与陷阱
Mult Scler. 2012 Jul;18(7):947-8. doi: 10.1177/1352458512451660.
7
Evidence and opinion: finding the proper balance.证据与观点:寻求恰当平衡
Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2012 Aug;24(4):201-2. doi: 10.1097/GCO.0b013e328355cb90.
8
The art of management decision making: from intuition to evidence-based medicine.管理决策的艺术:从直觉到循证医学。
Otolaryngol Clin North Am. 2012 Apr;45(2):333-51, viii. doi: 10.1016/j.otc.2012.01.001. Epub 2012 Feb 23.
9
Meta-analyses: what they can and cannot do.荟萃分析:能与不能。
Swiss Med Wkly. 2012 Mar 9;142:w13518. doi: 10.4414/smw.2012.13518. eCollection 2012.

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