Suppr超能文献

Cochrane系统评价在癌症姑息与支持治疗中的结论性

Conclusiveness of the Cochrane Reviews in Palliative and Supportive Care for Cancer.

作者信息

Zhang Xia, Wu Zhiyong, Zhao Haiqing, Li Chenxi, Wu Jianyu, Dai Guanghai

机构信息

1 Department of Oncology II, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing, China.

出版信息

Am J Hosp Palliat Care. 2017 Feb;34(1):53-56. doi: 10.1177/1049909115605058. Epub 2016 Jul 11.

Abstract

To assess the conclusiveness of the Cochrane reviews (CRs) in the field of palliative and supportive care for cancer. We searched the CRs on Pain, Palliative, and Supportive Care Group available in the Cochrane library on February 01, 2015, to analyze whether a CR could reach a clinical decision. Each CR was analyzed for conclusiveness, number of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) enrolled, number of participants enrolled, the need for further studies, and the reasons. Only 45% (30 of 66) of the CRs reached definitive clinical recommendations. The number of RCTs and participants enrolled in conclusive CRs were significantly higher than those in inconclusive CRs. Nearly all CRs recognized the need for further studies. The conclusiveness was not affected by the year of publication. We concluded that a large number of clinical trials were not carried out well in the palliative and supportive oncology.

摘要

评估Cochrane系统评价(CRs)在癌症姑息与支持治疗领域的结论性。我们检索了2015年2月1日Cochrane图书馆中疼痛、姑息与支持治疗组的CRs,以分析CR是否能得出临床决策。对每个CR进行结论性、纳入的随机对照试验(RCTs)数量、纳入的参与者数量、进一步研究的必要性及原因分析。只有45%(66个中的30个)的CR得出了明确的临床建议。得出结论性CR的RCTs数量和参与者数量显著高于未得出结论的CR。几乎所有CR都认识到有进一步研究的必要。结论性不受发表年份的影响。我们得出结论,在肿瘤姑息与支持治疗方面,大量临床试验开展得并不好。

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