• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

相似文献

1
Use of 95% confidence intervals in the reporting of between-group differences in randomized controlled trials: analysis of a representative sample of 200 physical therapy trials.在随机对照试验中报告组间差异时使用 95%置信区间:对 200 项物理治疗试验的代表性样本进行分析。
Braz J Phys Ther. 2019 Jul-Aug;23(4):302-310. doi: 10.1016/j.bjpt.2018.10.004. Epub 2018 Oct 16.
2
Methodologic Quality and Statistical Reporting of Physical Therapy Randomized Controlled Trials Relevant to Musculoskeletal Conditions.与肌肉骨骼疾病相关的物理治疗随机对照试验的方法学质量和统计报告
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2018 Jan;99(1):129-136. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2017.08.485. Epub 2017 Sep 28.
3
Reporting of confidence intervals, achievement of intended sample size, and adjustment for multiple primary outcomes in randomised trials of physical therapy interventions: an analysis of 100 representatively sampled trials.物理治疗干预随机试验中报告置信区间、实现预期样本量和调整多个主要结局:对 100 个具有代表性样本试验的分析。
Braz J Phys Ther. 2024 May-Jun;28(3):101079. doi: 10.1016/j.bjpt.2024.101079. Epub 2024 May 21.
4
Language of publication has a small influence on the quality of reports of controlled trials of physiotherapy interventions.出版语言对物理治疗干预措施的对照试验报告的质量有一定影响。
J Clin Epidemiol. 2013 Jan;66(1):78-84. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2012.08.004.
5
The quality and reporting of randomized trials in cardiothoracic physical therapy could be substantially improved.心脏和胸肺物理疗法的随机试验的质量和报告可以得到实质性的提高。
Respir Care. 2013 Nov;58(11):1899-906. doi: 10.4187/respcare.02379. Epub 2013 Apr 16.
6
Funding is related to the quality, conduct, and reporting of trial reports in musculoskeletal physical therapy: A survey of 210 published trials.资金与肌肉骨骼物理治疗试验报告的质量、开展及报告情况相关:对210篇已发表试验的调查
Physiother Theory Pract. 2016 Nov;32(8):628-635. doi: 10.1080/09593985.2016.1222472. Epub 2016 Sep 12.
7
The Quality of Reports of Randomized Controlled Trials Varies between Subdisciplines of Physiotherapy.随机对照试验报告的质量在物理治疗的不同子学科之间存在差异。
Physiother Can. 2014 Winter;66(1):36-43. doi: 10.3138/ptc.2012-68.
8
9
Many randomized trials of physical therapy interventions are not adequately registered: a survey of 200 published trials.许多物理治疗干预的随机试验没有得到充分注册:对 200 项已发表试验的调查。
Phys Ther. 2013 Mar;93(3):299-309. doi: 10.2522/ptj.20120206. Epub 2012 Nov 2.
10
How completely are physiotherapy interventions described in reports of randomised trials?随机试验报告中对物理治疗干预措施的描述有多完整?
Physiotherapy. 2016 Jun;102(2):121-6. doi: 10.1016/j.physio.2016.03.001. Epub 2016 Mar 12.

引用本文的文献

1
Conclusiveness of Cochrane systematic reviews is low but accumulating across time in physical therapy: A meta-research study.Cochrane系统评价的结论性较低,但在物理治疗领域随时间推移而不断积累:一项元研究。
Braz J Phys Ther. 2025 May-Jun;29(3):101190. doi: 10.1016/j.bjpt.2025.101190. Epub 2025 Mar 1.
2
Reporting of confidence intervals, achievement of intended sample size, and adjustment for multiple primary outcomes in randomised trials of physical therapy interventions: an analysis of 100 representatively sampled trials.物理治疗干预随机试验中报告置信区间、实现预期样本量和调整多个主要结局:对 100 个具有代表性样本试验的分析。
Braz J Phys Ther. 2024 May-Jun;28(3):101079. doi: 10.1016/j.bjpt.2024.101079. Epub 2024 May 21.
3
Confidence Interval: Advantages, Disadvantages and the Dilemma of Interpretation.置信区间:优势、劣势与解释困境。
Rev Recent Clin Trials. 2024;19(1):76-80. doi: 10.2174/0115748871266250231120043345.
4
Statistical inference through estimation: recommendations from the International Society of Physiotherapy Journal Editors.通过估计进行统计推断:来自国际物理治疗期刊编辑协会的建议。
J Man Manip Ther. 2022 Jun;30(3):133-138. doi: 10.1080/10669817.2022.2071980.
5
Statistical inference through estimation: recommendations from the International Society of Physiotherapy Journal Editors.通过估计进行统计推断:来自国际物理治疗期刊编辑协会的建议。
Phys Ther. 2022 Jun 3;102(6). doi: 10.1093/ptj/pzac066.
6
Comparison between 2000 and 2018 on the reporting of statistical significance and clinical relevance in physiotherapy clinical trials in six major physiotherapy journals: a meta-research design.比较六大主流物理治疗期刊 2000 年和 2018 年物理治疗临床试验中统计显著性和临床相关性报告情况:一项元研究设计。
BMJ Open. 2022 Jan 3;12(1):e054875. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-054875.
7
Current use of effect size or confidence interval analyses in clinical and biomedical research.效应量或置信区间分析在临床和生物医学研究中的当前应用。
Scientometrics. 2021;126(11):9133-9145. doi: 10.1007/s11192-021-04150-3. Epub 2021 Sep 18.
8
Showing confidence (intervals).显示置信区间。
Braz J Phys Ther. 2019 Jul-Aug;23(4):277-278. doi: 10.1016/j.bjpt.2019.01.003. Epub 2019 Jan 18.
9
Understanding and interpreting confidence and credible intervals around effect estimates.理解和解释效应估计的置信区间和可信区间。
Braz J Phys Ther. 2019 Jul-Aug;23(4):290-301. doi: 10.1016/j.bjpt.2018.12.006. Epub 2018 Dec 31.

本文引用的文献

1
Significance Test, Confidence Interval, Both or Neither?显著性检验、置信区间,二者皆用、二者皆不用,还是只用其一?
Clin Nurs Res. 2017 Jun;26(3):259-265. doi: 10.1177/1054773817708652.
2
Alternatives to P value: confidence interval and effect size.P值的替代方法:置信区间和效应量。
Korean J Anesthesiol. 2016 Dec;69(6):555-562. doi: 10.4097/kjae.2016.69.6.555. Epub 2016 Oct 25.
3
Statistical inference in abstracts of major medical and epidemiology journals 1975-2014: a systematic review.1975 - 2014年主要医学和流行病学杂志摘要中的统计推断:一项系统综述。
Eur J Epidemiol. 2017 Jan;32(1):21-29. doi: 10.1007/s10654-016-0211-1. Epub 2016 Nov 17.
4
Statistical tests, P values, confidence intervals, and power: a guide to misinterpretations.统计检验、P 值、置信区间与检验效能:误解指南
Eur J Epidemiol. 2016 Apr;31(4):337-50. doi: 10.1007/s10654-016-0149-3. Epub 2016 May 21.
5
How do I interpret a confidence interval?我该如何解读置信区间?
Transfusion. 2016 Jul;56(7):1680-3. doi: 10.1111/trf.13635. Epub 2016 May 17.
6
Evidence-based practice in physiotherapy: a systematic review of barriers, enablers and interventions.物理治疗中的循证实践:对障碍、促进因素及干预措施的系统评价
Physiotherapy. 2014 Sep;100(3):208-19. doi: 10.1016/j.physio.2014.03.001. Epub 2014 Mar 12.
7
Towards evidence-based physiotherapy - research challenges and needs.迈向循证物理治疗——研究挑战与需求
J Physiother. 2013 Sep;59(3):143-4. doi: 10.1016/S1836-9553(13)70178-4.
8
CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials.《CONSORT 2010声明:报告平行组随机试验的更新指南》
Int J Surg. 2011;9(8):672-7. doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2011.09.004. Epub 2011 Oct 13.
9
CENTRAL, PEDro, PubMed, and EMBASE are the most comprehensive databases indexing randomized controlled trials of physical therapy interventions.CENTRAL、PEDro、PubMed 和 EMBASE 是索引物理治疗干预措施的随机对照试验的最全面数据库。
Phys Ther. 2011 Feb;91(2):190-7. doi: 10.2522/ptj.20100116. Epub 2010 Dec 9.
10
There was evidence of convergent and construct validity of Physiotherapy Evidence Database quality scale for physiotherapy trials.物理治疗证据数据库质量量表对物理治疗试验具有汇聚效度和结构效度的证据。
J Clin Epidemiol. 2010 Aug;63(8):920-5. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2009.10.005. Epub 2010 Feb 20.

在随机对照试验中报告组间差异时使用 95%置信区间:对 200 项物理治疗试验的代表性样本进行分析。

Use of 95% confidence intervals in the reporting of between-group differences in randomized controlled trials: analysis of a representative sample of 200 physical therapy trials.

机构信息

Department of Physical Therapy, Universidade Estadual Paulista Júlio Mesquita Filho, Presidente Prudente, SP, Brazil.

Centre for Education & Workforce Development, Sydney Local Health District, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.

出版信息

Braz J Phys Ther. 2019 Jul-Aug;23(4):302-310. doi: 10.1016/j.bjpt.2018.10.004. Epub 2018 Oct 16.

DOI:10.1016/j.bjpt.2018.10.004
PMID:30366845
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6630101/
Abstract

OBJECTIVES

To assess the prevalence of the use of 95% confidence intervals in the reporting of between-group differences in randomized controlled trials of physical therapy interventions and to determine if the prevalence is changing over time.

METHODS

Observational study, including an analysis of 200 trials from the Physiotherapy Evidence Database: 50 from each of the years 1986, 1996, 2006, and 2016. The primary outcome used was the prevalence of the between-group difference presented with 95% confidence intervals. We also extracted trial characteristics for descriptive purposes (i.e., number of participants, number of sites involved in recruitment, country(ies) of data collection, funding, subdiscipline of physical therapy, publication language and total Physiotherapy Evidence Database score).

RESULTS

Most commonly, the trials were published in English (89%) and classified in the musculoskeletal subdiscipline (23%). The overall prevalence of use of confidence intervals was 29% and there was a consistent increase in reporting between 1986 and 2016, with peak usage in the 2016 cohort (42%). Confidence intervals were more likely to be used in trials that had received funding, were conducted in Europe and Oceania, and in trials with a Physiotherapy Evidence Database score of at least 6/10.

CONCLUSIONS

Most trials of physical therapy interventions do not report confidence intervals around between-group differences. However, use of confidence intervals is increasing steadily, especially among high-quality trials. Physical therapists must understand confidence intervals so that they can understand a growing number of trials in physical therapy.

摘要

目的

评估物理治疗干预随机对照试验报告中组间差异的 95%置信区间使用情况的流行率,并确定其是否随时间变化。

方法

观察性研究,包括对 Physiotherapy Evidence Database 中 200 项试验的分析:1986 年、1996 年、2006 年和 2016 年各 50 项。主要结果是使用置信区间呈现的组间差异的流行率。我们还提取了试验特征用于描述性目的(即参与者数量、参与招募的地点数量、数据收集的国家/地区、资金、物理治疗亚专业、出版语言和 Physiotherapy Evidence Database 总评分)。

结果

大多数试验以英语发表(89%),并归入肌肉骨骼亚专业(23%)。使用置信区间的总体流行率为 29%,1986 年至 2016 年期间报告呈持续增加趋势,2016 年队列的使用率最高(42%)。有资金、在欧洲和大洋洲进行、Physiotherapy Evidence Database 评分至少为 6/10 的试验更有可能使用置信区间。

结论

大多数物理治疗干预试验没有报告组间差异的置信区间。然而,置信区间的使用正在稳步增加,尤其是在高质量试验中。物理治疗师必须了解置信区间,以便能够理解越来越多的物理治疗试验。