• 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

一项调查以及利益相关者小组对气道疾病方面关键的系统评价问题进行了优先排序。

A survey and stakeholder group prioritised key systematic review questions in airways disease.

作者信息

Dennett Emma J, Stovold Elizabeth M, Fortescue Rebecca

机构信息

Population Health Research Institute, St George's, University of London, Cranmer Terrace, London SW17 0RE, UK.

出版信息

Dialogues Health. 2022 Jul 8;1:100028. doi: 10.1016/j.dialog.2022.100028. eCollection 2022 Dec.

DOI:10.1016/j.dialog.2022.100028
PMID:38515910
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10953928/
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

Priority setting is important for healthcare research. The Cochrane Airways Group wanted to prioritise topics for systematic reviews across all chronic respiratory diseases with limited resources and according to latest Cochrane policy.The objective was to prioritise 10 reviews of importance to the public (patients, carers, healthcare professionals and researchers) from a patient survey.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

We convened a stakeholder group of patients, carers, healthcare professionals and representatives from charities. We conducted an online survey to collect uncertainties about the treatment and management of respiratory disease from the public. Uncertainties were ranked by the stakeholder group, and scoping searches refined the uncertainties into systematic review questions.

RESULTS

We received 147 survey responses. We removed duplicates and blank responses and asked the stakeholder group to rank 100 uncertainties. The first round of voting produced a list of 29 topics and the second round resulted in 12 uncertainties. These uncertainties were scoped with literature searches and teased out further into systematic review topics. We identified 3 Cochrane reviews to update, 8 new review topics, and 3 evidence gaps.

CONCLUSION

We successfully convened a stakeholder group and prioritised a list of uncertainties in the treatment and management of airways diseases that had been identified by patients and the public.

摘要

目的

确定研究优先级对医疗保健研究很重要。考科蓝气道组希望在资源有限的情况下，根据考科蓝最新政策，对所有慢性呼吸道疾病系统评价的主题进行优先级排序。目标是从一项患者调查中确定10项对公众（患者、护理人员、医疗保健专业人员和研究人员）具有重要意义的系统评价。

研究设计与背景

我们召集了一个由患者、护理人员、医疗保健专业人员和慈善机构代表组成的利益相关者小组。我们开展了一项在线调查，以收集公众对呼吸道疾病治疗和管理的疑问。利益相关者小组对疑问进行了排序，范围界定检索将疑问细化为系统评价问题。

结果

我们收到了147份调查问卷回复。我们去除了重复和空白回复，并让利益相关者小组对100个疑问进行排序。第一轮投票产生了一份包含29个主题的清单，第二轮投票产生了12个疑问。通过文献检索对这些疑问进行了范围界定，并进一步梳理成系统评价主题。我们确定了3项考科蓝系统评价进行更新，8个新的系统评价主题，以及3个证据空白。

结论

我们成功召集了一个利益相关者小组，并对患者和公众所确定的气道疾病治疗和管理方面的疑问清单进行了优先级排序。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/eca5/10953928/200e206cf006/gr1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/eca5/10953928/200e206cf006/gr1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/eca5/10953928/200e206cf006/gr1.jpg

相似文献

1
A survey and stakeholder group prioritised key systematic review questions in airways disease.一项调查以及利益相关者小组对气道疾病方面关键的系统评价问题进行了优先排序。
Dialogues Health. 2022 Jul 8;1:100028. doi: 10.1016/j.dialog.2022.100028. eCollection 2022 Dec.
2
Identifying and prioritising unanswered research questions for people with hyperacusis: James Lind Alliance Hyperacusis Priority Setting Partnership.确定和优先考虑患有听觉过敏症人群的未解决研究问题：詹姆斯林德联盟听觉过敏优先事项设定伙伴关系。
BMJ Open. 2019 Nov 21;9(11):e032178. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-032178.
3
Rapid priority setting exercise on faecal incontinence for Cochrane Incontinence.对 Cochrane 尿失禁的粪便失禁进行快速优先事项设定。
BMJ Open Gastroenterol. 2022 May;9(1). doi: 10.1136/bmjgast-2021-000847.
4
Top research priorities for preterm birth: results of a prioritisation partnership between people affected by preterm birth and healthcare professionals.早产重点研究议题：受早产影响的人群与医疗保健专业人员之间的优先伙伴关系的结果。
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2019 Dec 30;19(1):528. doi: 10.1186/s12884-019-2654-3.
5
What are the most important unanswered research questions on rapid review methodology? A James Lind Alliance research methodology Priority Setting Partnership: the Priority III study protocol.关于快速综述方法，最重要的未解决研究问题有哪些？一项詹姆斯·林德联盟研究方法优先事项设定合作项目：优先事项III研究方案。
HRB Open Res. 2021 Nov 18;4:80. doi: 10.12688/hrbopenres.13321.2. eCollection 2021.
6
National priority setting partnership using a Delphi consensus process to develop neonatal research questions suitable for practice-changing randomised trials in the UK.利用德尔菲共识过程建立国家优先事项设定伙伴关系，以确定适合英国进行改变实践的随机试验的新生儿研究问题。
Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2023 Nov;108(6):569-574. doi: 10.1136/archdischild-2023-325504. Epub 2023 Apr 24.
7
Cochrane acute respiratory infections group's stakeholder engagement project identified systematic review priority areas.科克伦急性呼吸道感染组的利益相关者参与项目确定了系统评价优先领域。
J Clin Epidemiol. 2018 Oct;102:63-68. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2018.05.016. Epub 2018 May 22.
8
Research priorities for the management of broken bones of the upper limb in people over 50: a UK priority setting partnership with the James Lind Alliance.50 岁以上人群上肢骨折管理的研究重点：英国与詹姆斯林德联盟的优先事项设定伙伴关系。
BMJ Open. 2019 Dec 15;9(12):e030028. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-030028.
9
Rapid research and implementation priority setting for wound care uncertainties.快速研究和实施伤口护理不确定性的优先级设置。
PLoS One. 2017 Dec 5;12(12):e0188958. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0188958. eCollection 2017.
10
What are the most important unanswered research questions in trial retention? A James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership: the PRioRiTy II (Prioritising Retention in Randomised Trials) study.在临床试验中，哪些是最重要的未解决的研究问题？一项詹姆斯林德联盟优先事项设定伙伴关系：PRioRiTy II（随机试验中优先考虑保留率）研究。
Trials. 2019 Oct 15;20(1):593. doi: 10.1186/s13063-019-3687-7.

本文引用的文献

1
GOLD report: 2022 update.《慢性阻塞性肺疾病全球倡议》报告：2022年更新版
Lancet Respir Med. 2022 Feb;10(2):e20. doi: 10.1016/S2213-2600(21)00561-0. Epub 2021 Dec 20.
2
Involving stakeholders in research priority setting: a scoping review.让利益相关者参与研究优先级设定：一项范围综述
Res Involv Engagem. 2021 Oct 29;7(1):75. doi: 10.1186/s40900-021-00318-6.
3
Identifying priority review questions for Cochrane Eyes and Vision: protocol for a priority setting exercise.确定 Cochrane Eyes and Vision 的优先审查问题：一项优先设定实践的方案。
BMJ Open. 2021 Jun 25;11(6):e046319. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-046319.
4
The James Lind Alliance process approach: scoping review.詹姆斯·林德联盟过程方法：范围综述。
BMJ Open. 2019 Aug 30;9(8):e027473. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-027473.
5
Research priorities for young people with cancer: a UK priority setting partnership with the James Lind Alliance.癌症青少年的研究重点：英国与詹姆斯·林德联盟的优先事项设定合作项目
BMJ Open. 2019 Aug 5;9(8):e028119. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-028119.
6
Selecting, refining and identifying priority Cochrane Reviews in health communication and participation in partnership with consumers and other stakeholders.选择、精炼和确定与消费者及其他利益攸关方合作的健康传播领域中的优先 Cochrane 综述。
Health Res Policy Syst. 2019 Apr 29;17(1):45. doi: 10.1186/s12961-019-0444-z.
7
Facilitating Web-Based Collaboration in Evidence Synthesis (TaskExchange): Development and Analysis.促进基于网络的证据综合协作（任务交换）：开发与分析
JMIR Res Protoc. 2018 Dec 13;7(12):e188. doi: 10.2196/resprot.9285.
8
Cochrane acute respiratory infections group's stakeholder engagement project identified systematic review priority areas.科克伦急性呼吸道感染组的利益相关者参与项目确定了系统评价优先领域。
J Clin Epidemiol. 2018 Oct;102:63-68. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2018.05.016. Epub 2018 May 22.
9
The Burden of Illness of Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis: A Comprehensive Evidence Review.特发性肺纤维化的疾病负担：全面的证据综述。
Pharmacoeconomics. 2018 Jul;36(7):779-807. doi: 10.1007/s40273-018-0631-8.
10
Setting the top 10 research priorities to improve the health of people with Type 2 diabetes: a Diabetes UK-James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership.确定改善2型糖尿病患者健康状况的十大研究重点：英国糖尿病协会-詹姆斯·林德联盟优先事项设定合作项目
Diabet Med. 2018 Jul;35(7):862-870. doi: 10.1111/dme.13613. Epub 2018 Mar 15.