Suppr超能文献

识别和描述 2016 年美国眼科学会成人白内障首选实践指南的可靠证据。

Identification and Description of Reliable Evidence for 2016 American Academy of Ophthalmology Preferred Practice Pattern Guidelines for Cataract in the Adult Eye.

机构信息

Department of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland.

Department of Epidemiology, Center for Clinical Trials and Evidence Synthesis, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland.

出版信息

JAMA Ophthalmol. 2018 May 1;136(5):514-523. doi: 10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2018.0786.

Abstract

IMPORTANCE

Trustworthy clinical practice guidelines require reliable systematic reviews of the evidence to support recommendations. Since 2016, the American Academy of Ophthalmology (AAO) has partnered with Cochrane Eyes and Vision US Satellite to update their guidelines, the Preferred Practice Patterns (PPP).

OBJECTIVE

To describe experiences and findings related to identifying reliable systematic reviews that support topics likely to be addressed in the 2016 update of the 2011 AAO PPP guidelines on cataract in the adult eye.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Cross-sectional study. Systematic reviews on the management of cataract were searched for in an established database. Each relevant systematic review was mapped to 1 or more of the 24 management categories listed under the Management section of the table of contents of the 2011 AAO PPP guidelines. Data were extracted to determine the reliability of each systematic review using prespecified criteria, and the reliable systematic reviews were examined to find whether they were referenced in the 2016 AAO PPP guidelines. For comparison, we assessed whether the reliable systematic reviews published before February 2010 the last search date of the 2011 AAO PPP guidelines were referenced in the 2011 AAO PPP guidelines. Cochrane Eyes and Vision US Satellite did not provide systematic reviews to the AAO during the development of the 2011 AAO PPP guidelines.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Systematic review reliability was defined by reporting eligibility criteria, performing a comprehensive literature search, assessing methodologic quality of included studies, using appropriate methods for meta-analysis, and basing conclusions on review findings.

RESULTS

From 99 systematic reviews on management of cataract, 46 (46%) were classified as reliable. No evidence that a comprehensive search had been conducted was the most common reason a review was classified as unreliable. All 46 reliable systematic reviews were cited in the 2016 AAO PPP guidelines, and 8 of 15 available reliable reviews (53%) were cited in the 2011 PPP guidelines.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

The partnership between Cochrane Eyes and Vision US Satellite and the AAO provides the AAO access to an evidence base of relevant and reliable systematic reviews, thereby supporting robust and efficient clinical practice guidelines development to improve the quality of eye care.

摘要

重要性

可靠的临床实践指南需要对证据进行可靠的系统评价,以支持建议。自 2016 年以来,美国眼科学会(AAO)与 Cochrane Eyes and Vision US Satellite 合作,更新其指南,即首选实践模式(PPP)。

目的

描述与确定支持 2016 年更新 2011 年 AAO PPP 成人白内障指南相关主题的可靠系统评价有关的经验和发现。

设计、地点和参与者:横断面研究。在一个既定的数据库中搜索白内障管理方面的系统评价。每个相关的系统评价都被映射到目录的管理部分下列出的 24 个管理类别中的 1 个或多个类别。提取数据以使用预设标准确定每个系统评价的可靠性,并检查可靠的系统评价,以确定它们是否在 2016 年 AAO PPP 指南中被引用。为了比较,我们评估了在 2011 年 AAO PPP 指南的最后一次搜索日期(2010 年 2 月)之前发表的可靠系统评价是否在 2011 年 AAO PPP 指南中被引用。在 2011 年 AAO PPP 指南的制定过程中,Cochrane Eyes and Vision US Satellite 并未向 AAO 提供系统评价。

主要结果和措施

系统评价的可靠性是通过报告纳入标准、进行全面的文献检索、评估纳入研究的方法学质量、使用适当的荟萃分析方法以及基于综述结果得出结论来定义的。

结果

从 99 篇白内障管理的系统评价中,有 46 篇(46%)被归类为可靠。最常见的原因是被归类为不可靠的原因是没有证据表明已经进行了全面的检索。所有 46 篇可靠的系统评价均在 2016 年 AAO PPP 指南中被引用,15 篇可用的可靠评价中有 8 篇(53%)在 2011 年 PPP 指南中被引用。

结论和相关性

Cochrane Eyes and Vision US Satellite 与 AAO 的合作关系为 AAO 提供了相关可靠系统评价的证据基础,从而支持了稳健和高效的临床实践指南制定,以提高眼保健质量。

相似文献

引用本文的文献

2
Interventions for Dry Eye: An Overview of Systematic Reviews.干眼干预措施:系统评价概述。
JAMA Ophthalmol. 2024 Jan 1;142(1):58-74. doi: 10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2023.5751.
4
A bibliometric analysis of systematic reviews and meta-analyses in ophthalmology.眼科系统评价和荟萃分析的文献计量学分析
Front Med (Lausanne). 2023 Mar 2;10:1135592. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2023.1135592. eCollection 2023.
9
Does Ophthalmology Need Philosophy?眼科需要哲学吗?
Turk J Ophthalmol. 2021 Oct 26;51(5):301-307. doi: 10.4274/tjo.galenos.2021.29569.

本文引用的文献

1
Cataract in the Adult Eye Preferred Practice Pattern®.《成人眼部白内障首选诊疗模式》
Ophthalmology. 2017 Feb;124(2):P1-P119. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2016.09.027. Epub 2016 Oct 13.
4
Day care versus in-patient surgery for age-related cataract.日间手术与住院手术治疗年龄相关性白内障的比较
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 Nov 2;2015(11):CD004242. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004242.pub5.
5
Sub-Tenon's anaesthesia versus topical anaesthesia for cataract surgery.用于白内障手术的球后麻醉与表面麻醉的比较。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 Aug 27;2015(8):CD006291. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD006291.pub3.
9
Peribulbar versus retrobulbar anaesthesia for cataract surgery.白内障手术的球周麻醉与球后麻醉对比
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 Jul 2;2015(7):CD004083. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004083.pub3.

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