Barroso Thaís Silva, Cavalcante Marcelo Cortês, Santos João Baptista Gomes Dos, Belloti João Carlos, Faloppa Flávio, Moraes Vinícius Ynoe de
MD. Hand Surgery Resident, Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Escola Paulista de Medicina - Universidade Federal de São Paulo (EPM-UNIFESP), São Paulo (SP), Brazil.
MD. Resident in Orthopedic Surgery, Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Escola Paulista de Medicina - Universidade Federal de São Paulo (EPM-UNIFESP), São Paulo (SP), Brazil.
Sao Paulo Med J. 2017 Nov-Dec;135(6):556-560. doi: 10.1590/1516-3180.2017.0146260617. Epub 2017 Nov 17.
Hierarchy of evidence is an important measurement for assessing quality of literature. Information regarding quality of evidence within the Brazilian hand surgery setting is sparse, especially regarding whether research has improved in either quality or quantity. This study aimed to identify and classify hand surgery studies published in the two most important Brazilian orthopedics journals based on hierarchy of evidence, with comparisons with previously published data.
Bibliometric analysis study performed in a federal university.
Two independent researchers conducted an electronic database search for hand surgery studies published between 2010 and 2016 in Acta Ortopédica Brasileira and Revista Brasileira de Ortopedia. Eligible studies were subsequently classified according to methodological design, based on the Haynes pyramid model (HP) and the JBJS/AAOS levels of evidence and grades of recommendations (LOR). Qualitative and quantitative data were gathered regarding all studies. Previous data were considered to assess whether the proportion of high-quality studies had improved over time (2000-2009 versus 2010-2016).
The final analysis included 123 studies, mostly originating from the southeastern region (78.8%) and private institutions (65%), with self-funding (91.8%). Methodological assessment showed that 15.4% were classified as level I/II using HP and 16.4% using LOR. No significant difference in proportions of high-quality studies was found between the two periods of time assessed (5% versus 12%; P = 0.13).
Approximately 15% of hand surgery studies published in two major Brazilian journals were likely to be classified as high-quality through two different systems. Moreover, no trend towards quality-of-evidence improvement was found over the last 15 years.
证据等级是评估文献质量的重要指标。巴西手外科领域内关于证据质量的信息匮乏，尤其是关于研究在质量或数量上是否有所改进。本研究旨在根据证据等级对巴西两本最重要的骨科期刊上发表的手外科研究进行识别和分类，并与先前发表的数据进行比较。
在一所联邦大学进行的文献计量分析研究。
两名独立研究人员对2010年至2016年期间发表在《巴西骨科学报》和《巴西骨科学杂志》上的手外科研究进行电子数据库检索。随后，根据方法设计，基于海恩斯金字塔模型（HP）以及《骨与关节外科杂志》/美国骨与肌肉外科医师学会的证据水平和推荐等级（LOR）对符合条件的研究进行分类。收集了所有研究的定性和定量数据。考虑使用先前的数据来评估高质量研究的比例是否随时间有所提高（2000 - 2009年与2010 - 2016年）。
最终分析纳入了123项研究，这些研究大多来自东南部地区（78.8%）和私立机构（65%），且为自筹资金（91.8%）。方法学评估显示，使用HP分类时15.4%为I/II级，使用LOR分类时为16.4%。在评估的两个时间段之间，高质量研究的比例没有显著差异（5%对12%；P = 0.13）。
通过两种不同的系统，巴西两本主要期刊上发表的手外科研究中约15%可能被归类为高质量。此外，在过去15年中未发现证据质量改善的趋势。
