• 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
Healthcare professionals', students', patients' and donors' perceptions of stem cell research and therapy: a systematic review protocol.医疗保健专业人员、学生、患者和捐赠者对干细胞研究和治疗的看法:系统评价方案。
BMJ Open. 2019 Feb 22;9(2):e025801. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-025801.
2
The influence of narrative medicine on medical students' readiness for holistic care practice: a realist synthesis protocol.叙事医学对医学生整体照护实践准备的影响:一项实在论综述研究方案。
BMJ Open. 2019 Aug 2;9(8):e029588. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-029588.
3
Is computer-assisted instruction more effective than other educational methods in achieving ECG competence among medical students and residents? Protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.在医学生和住院医师中,计算机辅助教学在实现心电图能力方面是否比其他教育方法更有效?一项系统评价和荟萃分析的方案。
BMJ Open. 2017 Dec 26;7(12):e018811. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-018811.
4
Perceptions and experiences of the implementation, management, use and optimisation of electronic prescribing systems in hospital settings: protocol for a systematic review of qualitative studies.医院环境中电子处方系统实施、管理、使用及优化的认知与经验:定性研究的系统评价方案
BMJ Open. 2016 Jul 8;6(7):e011858. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-011858.
5
Effectiveness of interventions on healthcare professionals' understanding and use of conscience: a systematic review protocol.干预措施对医疗保健专业人员理解和使用良心的效果:系统评价方案。
BMJ Open. 2022 Jul 27;12(7):e053880. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-053880.
6
Medical students' attitudes towards well-being and welfare: a systematic review protocol.医学学生的幸福感和福利态度:系统评价方案
BMJ Open. 2024 May 22;14(5):e080977. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-080977.
7
Patients' and health professionals' attitudes and perceptions towards the initiation of preventive drugs for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease: protocol for a systematic review of qualitative studies.患者和卫生专业人员对启动心血管疾病一级预防预防性药物的态度和看法:定性研究系统评价方案
BMJ Open. 2019 Apr 11;9(4):e025587. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-025587.
8
Instruments for assessing health professionals' skills in breaking bad news: protocol for a systematic review of measurement properties.评估卫生专业人员在传递坏消息方面技能的工具:系统评价测量特性的方案。
BMJ Open. 2021 Aug 6;11(8):e048019. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-048019.
9
Effective components of exercise and physical activity-related behaviour-change interventions for chronic non-communicable diseases in Africa: protocol for a systematic mixed studies review with meta-analysis.非洲慢性非传染性疾病运动及与身体活动相关行为改变干预措施的有效组成部分:一项采用荟萃分析的系统混合研究综述方案
BMJ Open. 2015 Aug 12;5(8):e008036. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-008036.
10
Correction: Healthcare professionals', students', patients' and donors' perceptions of stem cell research and therapy: a systematic review protocol.更正:医疗保健专业人员、学生、患者及捐赠者对干细胞研究与治疗的看法:一项系统评价方案
BMJ Open. 2019 May 29;9(5):e025801corr1. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-025801corr1.

本文引用的文献

1
Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement.系统评价与Meta分析方案的首选报告项目(PRISMA-P)2015声明。
Syst Rev. 2015 Jan 1;4(1):1. doi: 10.1186/2046-4053-4-1.
2
Unproven stem cell-based interventions & physicians' professional obligations; a qualitative study with medical regulatory authorities in Canada.未经证实的基于干细胞的干预措施与医生的职业义务;对加拿大医学监管机构的定性研究
BMC Med Ethics. 2014 Oct 14;15:75. doi: 10.1186/1472-6939-15-75.
3
What's missing? Discussing stem cell translational research in educational information on stem cell "tourism".缺少了什么?探讨干细胞“旅游”教育信息中干细胞转化研究的相关内容。
J Law Med Ethics. 2013 Spring;41(1):254-68. doi: 10.1111/jlme.12017.
4
Use of human embryonic stem cells and umbilical cord blood stem cells for research and therapy: a prospective survey among health care professionals and patients in Switzerland.利用人类胚胎干细胞和脐带血干细胞进行研究和治疗:瑞士医护人员和患者的前瞻性调查。
Transfusion. 2013 Nov;53(11):2681-9. doi: 10.1111/trf.12137. Epub 2013 Mar 3.
5
Stem-cell tourism and scientific responsibility. Stem-cell researchers are in a unique position to curb the problem of stem-cell tourism.干细胞旅游与科学责任。干细胞研究人员在遏制干细胞旅游问题方面处于独特地位。
EMBO Rep. 2011 Sep 30;12(10):992-5. doi: 10.1038/embor.2011.156.
6
Stem cell tourism and doctors' duties to minors--a view from Canada.干细胞旅游与医生对未成年人的职责——来自加拿大的观点。
Am J Bioeth. 2010 May;10(5):3-15. doi: 10.1080/15265161003702865.
7
Methods for the synthesis of qualitative research: a critical review.定性研究的综合方法:批判性评价。
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2009 Aug 11;9:59. doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-9-59.
8
Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement.系统评价与Meta分析优先报告条目:PRISMA声明
PLoS Med. 2009 Jul 21;6(7):e1000097. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097.
9
Methods for the thematic synthesis of qualitative research in systematic reviews.系统评价中定性研究的主题综合方法。
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2008 Jul 10;8:45. doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-8-45.
10
Applying systematic review methods to studies of people's views: an example from public health research.将系统评价方法应用于关于人们观点的研究:来自公共卫生研究的一个例子。
J Epidemiol Community Health. 2004 Sep;58(9):794-800. doi: 10.1136/jech.2003.014829.

医疗保健专业人员、学生、患者和捐赠者对干细胞研究和治疗的看法:系统评价方案。

Healthcare professionals', students', patients' and donors' perceptions of stem cell research and therapy: a systematic review protocol.

机构信息

Chang Gung Medical Education Research Centre (CG-MERC), Chang Gung Memorial Hospital Taoyuan Branch, Taoyuan, Taiwan.

出版信息

BMJ Open. 2019 Feb 22;9(2):e025801. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-025801.

DOI:10.1136/bmjopen-2018-025801
PMID:30798317
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6398628/
Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Stem cell research (SCR) and the biomedical potential of developing therapies are crucial topics in biomedicine. Like other biotechnologies, stem cells are context specific entities understood through local conceptualisations of culture, politics, nationhood, as well as their perceived therapeutic efficacy. There is a need to recognise how these developments are understood within the healthcare community and by those who may use them. This protocol describes a systematic literature review that aims to explore healthcare professionals', healthcare students', patients', and donors' perceptions of SCR and therapy (SCR/T) and the factors that influence their perceptions.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta Analyses guidelines a systematic review will be undertaken. Web of Science, Scopus, Medline+Journals @Ovid and Ariti Library will be systematically searched for studies on healthcare professionals', healthcare students', patients' and donors' perceptions of SCR and developing therapies. All articles will be screened by a researcher for inclusion and evaluation based on 12 criteria for evaluating qualitative research. At least 20% of articles will also be reviewed by a second researcher and any disagreement will be solved via consensus. Data extracted from the articles will be analysed using thematic synthesis enabling the identification of concepts across studies and the development of new theory.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

As part of a larger research project, ethical approval has been provided by the Institutional Research Board (IRB) at Chang Gung Memorial Hospital. This review will be able to determine the impact that certain perceptions of SCR/T will have on the development of future medical knowledge and practice. The results of the study will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and disseminated at relevant conferences.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42018103627.

摘要

简介

干细胞研究(SCR)和开发疗法的生物医学潜力是生物医学中的关键主题。与其他生物技术一样,干细胞是通过文化、政治、国家的局部概念化以及它们被认为的治疗效果来理解的特定于上下文的实体。有必要认识到这些发展在医疗保健界以及可能使用它们的人当中是如何被理解的。本方案描述了一项系统文献综述,旨在探讨医疗保健专业人员、医疗保健学生、患者和供者对 SCR 和治疗(SCR/T)的看法,以及影响他们看法的因素。

方法和分析

根据系统评价和荟萃分析的首选报告项目指南,将进行系统综述。将通过 Web of Science、Scopus、Medline+Journals@Ovid 和 Ariti 图书馆对医疗保健专业人员、医疗保健学生、患者和供者对 SCR 和开发疗法的看法进行系统搜索。根据评估定性研究的 12 项标准,将由一名研究人员筛选所有文章是否纳入和评估。至少有 20%的文章也将由第二名研究人员进行审查,如果有任何分歧,将通过协商解决。从文章中提取的数据将使用主题综合分析进行分析,从而识别研究之间的概念,并发展新的理论。

伦理和传播

作为一个更大的研究项目的一部分,长庚纪念医院机构研究委员会(IRB)已提供了伦理批准。这项综述将能够确定对 SCR/T 的某些看法将对未来医学知识和实践的发展产生何种影响。该研究的结果将发表在同行评议的期刊上,并在相关会议上传播。

PROSPERO 注册号:CRD42018103627。