• 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

基准对照试验——一个涵盖所有观察性有效性研究的新概念。

Benchmarking Controlled Trial--a novel concept covering all observational effectiveness studies.

作者信息

Malmivaara Antti

机构信息

Centre for Health and Social Economics, National Institute for Health and Welfare , Helsinki , Finland.

出版信息

Ann Med. 2015 Jun;47(4):332-40. doi: 10.3109/07853890.2015.1027255. Epub 2015 May 12.

DOI:10.3109/07853890.2015.1027255
PMID:25965700
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4673508/
Abstract

The Benchmarking Controlled Trial (BCT) is a novel concept which covers all observational studies aiming to assess effectiveness. BCTs provide evidence of the comparative effectiveness between health service providers, and of effectiveness due to particular features of the health and social care systems. BCTs complement randomized controlled trials (RCTs) as the sources of evidence on effectiveness. This paper presents a definition of the BCT; compares the position of BCTs in assessing effectiveness with that of RCTs; presents a checklist for assessing methodological validity of a BCT; and pilot-tests the checklist with BCTs published recently in the leading medical journals.

摘要

基准对照试验(BCT)是一个新颖的概念,涵盖了所有旨在评估有效性的观察性研究。BCT提供了医疗服务提供者之间比较有效性的证据,以及由于卫生和社会护理系统的特定特征而产生的有效性证据。BCT作为有效性证据的来源,对随机对照试验(RCT)起到了补充作用。本文给出了BCT的定义;比较了BCT在评估有效性方面与RCT的地位;给出了一份评估BCT方法学有效性的清单;并用最近发表在主要医学期刊上的BCT对该清单进行了预测试。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c0c0/4673508/f1cc625773e6/iann_a_1027255_f0001_b.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c0c0/4673508/f1cc625773e6/iann_a_1027255_f0001_b.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c0c0/4673508/f1cc625773e6/iann_a_1027255_f0001_b.jpg

相似文献

1
Benchmarking Controlled Trial--a novel concept covering all observational effectiveness studies.基准对照试验——一个涵盖所有观察性有效性研究的新概念。
Ann Med. 2015 Jun;47(4):332-40. doi: 10.3109/07853890.2015.1027255. Epub 2015 May 12.
2
Assessing validity of observational intervention studies - the Benchmarking Controlled Trials.评估观察性干预研究的有效性——基准对照试验
Ann Med. 2016 Sep;48(6):440-443. doi: 10.1080/07853890.2016.1186830. Epub 2016 May 29.
3
Clinical Impact Research - how to choose experimental or observational intervention study?临床影响研究——如何选择实验性或观察性干预研究?
Ann Med. 2016 Nov;48(7):492-495. doi: 10.1080/07853890.2016.1186828. Epub 2016 Aug 5.
4
Pros and Cons of Randomized Controlled Trials and Benchmarking Controlled Trials in Rehabilitation: An Academic Debate within the European Academy of Rehabilitation Medicine.康复随机对照试验和基准对照试验的优缺点:欧洲康复医学学院内部的学术辩论。
J Rehabil Med. 2022 Oct 10;54:jrm00319. doi: 10.2340/jrm.v54.2511.
5
System impact research - increasing public health and health care system performance.系统影响研究——提高公共卫生和医疗保健系统绩效。
Ann Med. 2016;48(4):211-5. doi: 10.3109/07853890.2016.1155228. Epub 2016 Mar 15.
6
Assessing treatment effects in the "real world".评估“现实世界”中的治疗效果。
Clin Ther. 2010 Oct;32(11):1952-3. doi: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2010.10.008.
7
Using Big Data to Emulate a Target Trial When a Randomized Trial Is Not Available.在没有随机试验时使用大数据模拟目标试验。
Am J Epidemiol. 2016 Apr 15;183(8):758-64. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwv254. Epub 2016 Mar 18.
8
Review of guidelines for good practice in decision-analytic modelling in health technology assessment.卫生技术评估中决策分析模型良好实践指南综述。
Health Technol Assess. 2004 Sep;8(36):iii-iv, ix-xi, 1-158. doi: 10.3310/hta8360.
9
What works to increase attendance for diabetic retinopathy screening? An evidence synthesis and economic analysis.哪些措施有助于提高糖尿病视网膜病变筛查的参与度?一项证据综合和经济分析。
Health Technol Assess. 2018 May;22(29):1-160. doi: 10.3310/hta22290.
10
Randomized controlled trials and comparative effectiveness research.随机对照试验和比较效果研究。
J Clin Oncol. 2012 Dec 1;30(34):4194-201. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2012.42.2352. Epub 2012 Oct 15.

引用本文的文献

1
Outreach acute care for nursing homes: an observational study on the quality and cost-effectiveness of the Mobile Hospital.养老院的外展急性护理:关于移动医院质量和成本效益的观察性研究
Age Ageing. 2025 Jan 6;54(1). doi: 10.1093/ageing/afae287.
2
The veracity function: integrity, and comprehensiveness of evidence.准确性函数:证据的完整性和全面性。
J Rehabil Med. 2024 Sep 30;56:jrm40350. doi: 10.2340/jrm.v56.40350.
3
Effectiveness of a classification-based approach to low back pain in primary care - a benchmarking controlled trial.

本文引用的文献

1
Comparing ischaemic stroke in six European countries. The EuroHOPE register study.比较六个欧洲国家的缺血性脑卒中。EuroHOPE 登记研究。
Eur J Neurol. 2015 Feb;22(2):284-91, e25-6. doi: 10.1111/ene.12560. Epub 2014 Sep 8.
2
Mortality from ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms: clinical lessons from a comparison of outcomes in England and the USA.破裂性腹主动脉瘤的死亡率:来自英格兰和美国的比较结果的临床教训。
Lancet. 2014 Mar 15;383(9921):963-9. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(14)60109-4.
3
Nurse staffing and education and hospital mortality in nine European countries: a retrospective observational study.
基于分类的腰痛管理方案在初级保健中的效果 - 基准对照试验。
J Rehabil Med. 2024 Apr 20;56:jrm28321. doi: 10.2340/jrm.v56.28321.
4
Introduction to target trial emulation in rehabilitation: a systematic approach to emulate a randomized controlled trial using observational data.康复中的目标试验模拟简介:使用观察数据模拟随机对照试验的系统方法。
Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2024 Feb;60(1):145-153. doi: 10.23736/S1973-9087.24.08435-1.
5
Measuring outcomes of rehabilitation among the elderly-a feasibility study.老年人康复效果评估——一项可行性研究
Front Health Serv. 2023 Sep 15;3:1187713. doi: 10.3389/frhs.2023.1187713. eCollection 2023.
6
The Finnish spine register (FinSpine): development, design, validation and utility.芬兰脊柱注册研究(FinSpine):研发、设计、验证和应用。
Eur Spine J. 2023 Nov;32(11):3731-3743. doi: 10.1007/s00586-023-07874-3. Epub 2023 Sep 17.
7
Common Bias and Challenges in Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine Research: How to Tackle Them.物理医学与康复医学研究中的常见偏倚与挑战:如何应对
Front Rehabil Sci. 2022 Jun 13;3:873241. doi: 10.3389/fresc.2022.873241. eCollection 2022.
8
Pros and Cons of Randomized Controlled Trials and Benchmarking Controlled Trials in Rehabilitation: An Academic Debate within the European Academy of Rehabilitation Medicine.康复随机对照试验和基准对照试验的优缺点:欧洲康复医学学院内部的学术辩论。
J Rehabil Med. 2022 Oct 10;54:jrm00319. doi: 10.2340/jrm.v54.2511.
9
Classifying outcomes in secondary and tertiary care clinical quality registries-an organizational case study with the COMET taxonomy.二级和三级保健临床质量登记处的结局分类——采用 COMET 分类学的组织案例研究。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2022 Jun 21;22(1):806. doi: 10.1186/s12913-022-08132-w.
10
7th Baltic and North Sea Conference on Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine Vascular Rehabilitation - the Journey from Causes to Results.第七届波罗的海与北海物理与康复医学会议:血管康复——从病因到结果的历程
J Rehabil Med. 2022 Jun 1;54:1-28. doi: 10.2340/jrm.v54.2945.
九个欧洲国家的护士配备和教育与医院死亡率:回顾性观察研究。
Lancet. 2014 May 24;383(9931):1824-30. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(13)62631-8. Epub 2014 Feb 26.
4
On decreasing inequality in health care in a cost-effective way.以具有成本效益的方式减少医疗保健方面的不平等。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2014 Feb 20;14:79. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-14-79.
5
Acute myocardial infarction: a comparison of short-term survival in national outcome registries in Sweden and the UK.急性心肌梗死:瑞典和英国国家结局注册研究中短期生存率的比较。
Lancet. 2014 Apr 12;383(9925):1305-1312. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(13)62070-X. Epub 2014 Jan 23.
6
Arthroscopic partial meniscectomy versus sham surgery for a degenerative meniscal tear.关节镜下半月板部分切除术与假手术治疗退行性半月板撕裂。
N Engl J Med. 2013 Dec 26;369(26):2515-24. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1305189.
7
Surgical skill and complication rates after bariatric surgery.减重手术后的手术技能和并发症发生率。
N Engl J Med. 2013 Oct 10;369(15):1434-42. doi: 10.1056/NEJMsa1300625.
8
Benchmarking is associated with improved quality of care in type 2 diabetes: the OPTIMISE randomized, controlled trial.基准评估与改善2型糖尿病的护理质量相关:OPTIMISE随机对照试验
Diabetes Care. 2013 Nov;36(11):3388-95. doi: 10.2337/dc12-1853. Epub 2013 Jul 11.
9
Addicted to constructs: science in reverse?沉迷于建构:科学的逆行?
Addiction. 2013 Sep;108(9):1532-3. doi: 10.1111/add.12227. Epub 2013 May 30.
10
Health care performance comparison using a disease-based approach: the EuroHOPE project.基于疾病的医疗保健绩效比较:EuroHOPE 项目。
Health Policy. 2013 Sep;112(1-2):100-9. doi: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2013.04.013. Epub 2013 May 14.