Suppr超能文献

用于评估横断面研究质量的批判性评价工具(AXIS)的开发。

Development of a critical appraisal tool to assess the quality of cross-sectional studies (AXIS).

作者信息

Downes Martin J, Brennan Marnie L, Williams Hywel C, Dean Rachel S

机构信息

Centre for Applied Health Economics, School of Medicine, Griffith University, Meadowbrook, Queensland, Australia.

Centre for Evidence-based Veterinary Medicine, The University of Nottingham, Loughborough, UK.

出版信息

BMJ Open. 2016 Dec 8;6(12):e011458. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-011458.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to develop a critical appraisal (CA) tool that addressed study design and reporting quality as well as the risk of bias in cross-sectional studies (CSSs). In addition, the aim was to produce a help document to guide the non-expert user through the tool.

DESIGN

An initial scoping review of the published literature and key epidemiological texts was undertaken prior to the formation of a Delphi panel to establish key components for a CA tool for CSSs. A consensus of 80% was required from the Delphi panel for any component to be included in the final tool.

RESULTS

An initial list of 39 components was identified through examination of existing resources. An international Delphi panel of 18 medical and veterinary experts was established. After 3 rounds of the Delphi process, the Appraisal tool for Cross-Sectional Studies (AXIS tool) was developed by consensus and consisted of 20 components. A detailed explanatory document was also developed with the tool, giving expanded explanation of each question and providing simple interpretations and examples of the epidemiological concepts being examined in each question to aid non-expert users.

CONCLUSIONS

CA of the literature is a vital step in evidence synthesis and therefore evidence-based decision-making in a number of different disciplines. The AXIS tool is therefore unique and was developed in a way that it can be used across disciplines to aid the inclusion of CSSs in systematic reviews, guidelines and clinical decision-making.

摘要

目的

本研究的目的是开发一种批判性评价(CA)工具,该工具可评估横断面研究(CSS)的研究设计、报告质量以及偏倚风险。此外,还要编写一份帮助文档,指导非专业用户使用该工具。

设计

在组建德尔菲小组之前,对已发表的文献和关键流行病学文本进行了初步的范围综述,以确定CSS批判性评价工具的关键组成部分。德尔菲小组中任何一个组成部分要纳入最终工具,都需要达成80%的共识。

结果

通过审查现有资源,确定了一份包含39个组成部分的初始清单。成立了一个由18名医学和兽医学专家组成的国际德尔菲小组。经过三轮德尔菲过程,通过共识开发出了横断面研究评价工具(AXIS工具),该工具由20个组成部分组成。还随该工具编写了一份详细的解释性文档,对每个问题进行了详细解释,并对每个问题中所考察的流行病学概念提供了简单的解释和示例,以帮助非专业用户。

结论

文献的批判性评价是证据综合以及许多不同学科基于证据的决策中的关键一步。因此,AXIS工具是独一无二的,其开发方式使其可跨学科使用,以帮助将横断面研究纳入系统评价、指南制定和临床决策。

相似文献

1
Development of a critical appraisal tool to assess the quality of cross-sectional studies (AXIS).
BMJ Open. 2016 Dec 8;6(12):e011458. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-011458.
2
The use of a modified Delphi technique to develop a critical appraisal tool for clinical pharmacokinetic studies.
Int J Clin Pharm. 2022 Aug;44(4):894-903. doi: 10.1007/s11096-022-01390-y. Epub 2022 Mar 20.
7
Methodology for the systematic reviews on an adjacent segment pathology.
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2012 Oct 15;37(22 Suppl):S10-7. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31826cd9c8.
9
10
Methodology for the systematic reviews on an evidence-based approach for the management of chronic low back pain.
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2011 Oct 1;36(21 Suppl):S10-8. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31822ef8ee.

引用本文的文献

1
Methodological Standards for Conducting High-Quality Systematic Reviews.
Biology (Basel). 2025 Aug 1;14(8):973. doi: 10.3390/biology14080973.
2
Carbohydrate Intake and Bacterial Vaginosis: A Systematic Review.
Am J Lifestyle Med. 2025 Aug 28:15598276251367659. doi: 10.1177/15598276251367659.
3
Definition and measurement of functional first web space: A scoping review.
Hand Ther. 2025 Aug 29:17589983251372955. doi: 10.1177/17589983251372955.
4
Islet dimension and its impact on transplant outcome: A systematic review.
World J Transplant. 2025 Sep 18;15(3):102383. doi: 10.5500/wjt.v15.i3.102383.
5
Motivation, barriers, and willingness to participate in clinical trials for novel cancer treatments among the Vietnamese population.
PLoS One. 2025 Aug 29;20(8):e0331250. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0331250. eCollection 2025.
7
Factors that facilitate treatment uptake for women with alcohol use disorders in high-income countries: A systematic review.
Womens Health (Lond). 2025 Jan-Dec;21:17455057251363713. doi: 10.1177/17455057251363713. Epub 2025 Aug 27.
9
Prevalence of occupational stress-related syndromes among health care workers in Latin America from 2019 to 2023.
Rev Bras Med Trab. 2025 Aug 25;23(1):e20241329. doi: 10.47626/1679-4435-2024-1329. eCollection 2025 Jan-Mar.

本文引用的文献

1
Methods used to estimate the size of the owned cat and dog population: a systematic review.
BMC Vet Res. 2013 Jun 19;9:121. doi: 10.1186/1746-6148-9-121.
3
A review of critical appraisal tools show they lack rigor: Alternative tool structure is proposed.
J Clin Epidemiol. 2011 Jan;64(1):79-89. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.02.008. Epub 2010 Jun 18.
4
Teaching critical health literacy in the US as a means to action on the social determinants of health.
Health Promot Int. 2011 Mar;26(1):4-13. doi: 10.1093/heapro/daq049. Epub 2010 Aug 20.
5
CONSORT 2010 Statement: Updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials.
J Clin Epidemiol. 2010 Aug;63(8):834-40. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.02.005. Epub 2010 Mar 25.
8
Evaluating the evidence: is there a rigid hierarchy?
Circulation. 2008 Oct 14;118(16):1675-84. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.107.721357.

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