Suppr超能文献

前瞻性葡萄酒色斑研究中使用的临床结局测量和评分系统:系统评价。

Clinical outcome measures and scoring systems used in prospective studies of port wine stains: A systematic review.

机构信息

Department of Pharmaceutics, Jiaxing Key Laboratory for Photonanomedicine and Experimental Therapeutics, College of Medicine, Jiaxing University, Jiaxing, Zhejiang, PR China.

Department of Plastic, Reconstructive, and Hand Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.

出版信息

PLoS One. 2020 Jul 2;15(7):e0235657. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0235657. eCollection 2020.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Valid and reliable outcome measures are needed to determine and compare treatment results of port wine stain (PWS) studies. Besides, uniformity in outcome measures is crucial to enable inter-study comparisons and meta-analyses. This study aimed to assess the heterogeneity in reported PWS outcome measures by mapping the (clinical) outcome measures currently used in prospective PWS studies.

METHODS

OVID MEDLINE, OVID Embase, and CENTRAL were searched for prospective PWS studies published from 2005 to May 2020. Interventional studies with a clinical efficacy assessment were included. Two reviewers independently evaluated methodological quality using a modified Downs and Black checklist.

RESULTS

In total, 85 studies comprising 3,310 patients were included in which 94 clinician/observer-reported clinical efficacy assessments had been performed using 46 different scoring systems. Eighty-one- studies employed a global assessment of PWS appearance/improvement, of which -82% was expressed as percentage improvement and categorized in 26 different scoring systems. A wide variety of other global and multi-item scoring systems was identified. As a result of outcome heterogeneity and insufficient data reporting, only 44% of studies could be directly compared. A minority of studies included patient-reported or objective outcomes. Thirteen studies of good quality were found.

CONCLUSION

Clinical PWS outcomes are highly heterogeneous, which hampers study comparisons and meta-analyses. Consensus-based development of a core outcome-set would benefit future research and clinical practice, especially considering the lack of high-quality trials.

摘要

背景

为了确定和比较葡萄酒色斑(PWS)研究的治疗结果,需要有效的和可靠的结果测量方法。此外,结果测量方法的一致性对于实现研究之间的比较和荟萃分析至关重要。本研究旨在通过绘制当前用于前瞻性 PWS 研究的(临床)结果测量方法,评估报告的 PWS 结果测量方法的异质性。

方法

在 OVID MEDLINE、OVID Embase 和 CENTRAL 中搜索了 2005 年至 2020 年 5 月发表的前瞻性 PWS 研究。纳入了具有临床疗效评估的干预性研究。两名审查员使用改良的 Downs 和 Black 清单独立评估方法学质量。

结果

共纳入 85 项研究,包括 3310 例患者,其中 94 项临床医生/观察者报告的临床疗效评估使用了 46 种不同的评分系统。81 项研究采用了 PWS 外观/改善的整体评估,其中 82%以百分比改善表示,并分为 26 种不同的评分系统。还确定了其他各种全球和多项目评分系统。由于结果的异质性和数据报告不足,只有 44%的研究可以直接进行比较。少数研究包括患者报告的或客观的结果。发现了 13 项质量较好的研究。

结论

临床 PWS 结局高度异质,这阻碍了研究比较和荟萃分析。基于共识的核心结局集的制定将有益于未来的研究和临床实践,特别是考虑到缺乏高质量的试验。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/20c8/7332045/8d173e3aa0a5/pone.0235657.g001.jpg

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