Jesus Tiago S
Portuguese Ministry of Education, Aggregation of Schools of Escariz, Escariz, Portugal.
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2016 Nov;97(11):1853-1862.e2. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2016.06.017. Epub 2016 Jul 15.
To analyze publication trends of clinical trials (CTs) and systematic reviews (SRs) in rehabilitation.
PubMed searches were performed with appropriate combinations of Medical Subject Headings. All entries until December 2013, and their yearly distributions since 1981 (when the first rehabilitation SR was identified), were retrieved. After the initial data visualization, data analyses were narrowed to specific periods. Linear regression techniques analyzed the growth of publications and their relative percentages over time.
Not applicable.
Not applicable.
Not applicable.
Not applicable.
Although not observed for SRs, CTs have grown at a much higher rate in rehabilitation than in the broader health/medical field-more than twice the difference for both periods analyzed (1989-2001, 2001-2013). Rehabilitation journals published about 20% or less of the rehabilitation SRs and CTs, and no significant increases were observed over time (P>.05; 2001-2013). Neurologic conditions, particularly cerebrovascular, were the most addressed by rehabilitation SRs and CTs, while differences between neurologic and other groups of conditions typically widened over time (eg, more than doubled between neurologic and musculoskeletal conditions in 15y).
While publications of CTs are increasing at a much higher rate within rehabilitation than within broader health care, further research is warranted to explain why this trend is not being followed by SRs, particularly those with meta-analysis. Similarly, research might determine whether the (growing) differences in the publications of rehabilitation SRs and CTs across groups of conditions are justified by clinical or population need.
分析康复领域临床试验(CTs)和系统评价(SRs)的发表趋势。
使用医学主题词的适当组合在PubMed中进行检索。检索截至2013年12月的所有条目,以及自1981年(首次识别出康复领域的系统评价时)以来的年度分布情况。在进行初步数据可视化之后,将数据分析范围缩小到特定时期。采用线性回归技术分析出版物数量的增长及其随时间的相对百分比。
不适用。
不适用。
不适用。
不适用。
虽然系统评价未观察到这种情况,但康复领域临床试验的增长速度远高于更广泛的健康/医学领域——在所分析的两个时期(1989 - 2001年、2001 - 2013年)差异均超过两倍。康复期刊发表的康复系统评价和临床试验约占20%或更少,且随时间未观察到显著增加(P>0.05;2001 - 2013年)。神经系统疾病,尤其是脑血管疾病,是康复系统评价和临床试验中涉及最多的疾病,而神经系统疾病与其他疾病组之间的差异通常随时间扩大(例如,15年间神经系统疾病与肌肉骨骼疾病之间的差异增加了一倍多)。
虽然康复领域临床试验的发表数量增长速度远高于更广泛的医疗保健领域,但仍需要进一步研究来解释为什么系统评价,尤其是那些进行荟萃分析的系统评价,没有遵循这一趋势。同样,研究可以确定康复系统评价和临床试验在不同疾病组发表数量上(不断扩大)的差异是否由临床或人群需求所证实。