Suppr超能文献

肌肉骨骼疾病随机对照试验中复杂干预措施的过程评价:系统评价方案。

Process evaluation of complex interventions tested in randomised controlled trials in musculoskeletal disorders: a systematic review protocol.

机构信息

School of Physiotherapy, University of Otago Division of Health Sciences, Dunedin, New Zealand.

Department of Surgical Sciences, Dunedin School of Medicine, University of Otago Division of Health Sciences, Dunedin, New Zealand.

出版信息

BMJ Open. 2019 May 19;9(5):e028160. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-028160.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

The effectiveness of complex interventions for the management of musculoskeletal disorders has been estimated in many randomised clinical trials (RCTs). These trials inform which interventions are the most effective, however they do not always inform how an intervention achieved its clinical outcomes, nor how and what elements of an intervention were delivered to patients. Such information is useful for translating findings into clinical practice. A few process evaluation studies have been conducted alongside RCTs and a variety of methods have been used. To gain a better understanding of current practices of process evaluation in RCTs in musculoskeletal disorders, this systematic review is designed to answer the following research question: How are process evaluation of complex interventions tested in RCTs in musculoskeletal disorders being conducted?

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will systematically search seven electronic databases (MEDLINE, SCOPUS, CINAHL, PsycINFO, EMBASE, Web of Science and Cochrane database) from the date of inception to August 2018 for studies on process evaluation of RCTs on non-surgical and non-pharmacological management of musculoskeletal disorders. We will include qualitative and quantitative studies conducted alongside RCTs, reported with the RCTs or separate studies that assessed interventions for musculoskeletal disorders. Two reviewers will screen abstracts and apply prespecified inclusion criteria to identify relevant studies, extract the data and assess the risk of bias within included studies. We will follow recommendations from the 'Cochrane Qualitative and Implementation Methods Group Guidance Series' when assessing methodological strengths and limitations of included studies. We will use a narrative synthesis to describe findings.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval is not required as this review will not collect original data. Findings from this systematic review will be presented at a scientific conference and published in a peer reviewed journal.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42018109600.

摘要

简介

许多随机临床试验(RCT)已经评估了针对肌肉骨骼疾病管理的复杂干预措施的有效性。这些试验告知了哪些干预措施最有效,但它们并不总是告知干预措施如何实现其临床结果,也不告知干预措施如何以及向患者提供了哪些干预措施的内容。此类信息对于将研究结果转化为临床实践非常有用。已经进行了一些与 RCT 同时进行的过程评估研究,并使用了各种方法。为了更好地了解肌肉骨骼疾病 RCT 中过程评估的当前实践情况,本系统评价旨在回答以下研究问题:肌肉骨骼疾病 RCT 中复杂干预措施的过程评估是如何进行的?

方法和分析

我们将从建立数据库之日起至 2018 年 8 月,系统地在 7 个电子数据库(MEDLINE、SCOPUS、CINAHL、PsycINFO、EMBASE、Web of Science 和 Cochrane 数据库)中搜索有关肌肉骨骼疾病非手术和非药物治疗 RCT 过程评估的研究。我们将包括与 RCT 同时进行的定性和定量研究,以及与 RCT 一起报告或单独评估肌肉骨骼疾病干预措施的研究。两位审阅者将筛选摘要并应用预设的纳入标准来识别相关研究,提取数据并评估纳入研究的偏倚风险。我们将根据“Cochrane 定性和实施方法组指南系列”评估纳入研究的方法学优势和局限性。我们将使用叙述性综合法描述研究结果。

伦理和传播

由于本综述不会收集原始数据,因此不需要伦理批准。本系统评价的结果将在科学会议上提出,并在同行评审期刊上发表。

PROSPERO 注册号:CRD42018109600。

相似文献

3
The future of Cochrane Neonatal.
Early Hum Dev. 2020 Nov;150:105191. doi: 10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2020.105191. Epub 2020 Sep 12.
10

本文引用的文献

4
Cochrane Qualitative and Implementation Methods Group guidance series-paper 1: introduction.
J Clin Epidemiol. 2018 May;97:35-38. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.09.025. Epub 2017 Dec 11.

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