• 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

社区卫生干预实践指南的制定方法。

An approach to the development of practice guidelines for community health interventions.

作者信息

Gyorkos T W, Tannenbaum T N, Abrahamowicz M, Oxman A D, Scott E A, Millson M E, Rasooly I, Frank J W, Riben P D, Mathias R G

机构信息

Department of Family Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario.

出版信息

Can J Public Health. 1994 Jul-Aug;85 Suppl 1:S8-13.

PMID:7987764
Abstract

The Community Health Practice Guidelines (CHPG) project was initiated to develop a systematic approach to the critical evaluation of evidence on the effectiveness and efficiency of community health interventions and to the formulation of evidence-based practice recommendations. Three community health interventions--immunization delivery methods, partner notification for sexually transmitted diseases and the combination of restaurant inspection and education of food handlers--were used as prototypes to develop a standardized approach. The CHPG process consists of three components: a review of scientific evidence, a practice survey and formulation of practice guidelines. Imperatives for further development of the CHPG and define research priorities process include creating a coalition of public health organizations to sponsor the process and refining the consensus process so that the practice guidelines accurately reflect both the scientific basis of public health practice and the values of those affected.

摘要

社区卫生实践指南(CHPG)项目旨在开发一种系统方法,用于对社区卫生干预措施的有效性和效率证据进行批判性评估,并制定基于证据的实践建议。三种社区卫生干预措施——免疫接种交付方式、性传播疾病的性伴通知以及餐馆检查与食品从业人员教育相结合——被用作开发标准化方法的原型。CHPG过程包括三个组成部分:科学证据审查、实践调查和实践指南制定。CHPG进一步发展及确定研究重点过程的当务之急包括创建一个公共卫生组织联盟来赞助该过程,并完善共识过程,以使实践指南准确反映公共卫生实践的科学依据以及受影响人群的价值观。

相似文献

1
An approach to the development of practice guidelines for community health interventions.社区卫生干预实践指南的制定方法。
Can J Public Health. 1994 Jul-Aug;85 Suppl 1:S8-13.
2
The evaluation of the effectiveness of routine restaurant inspections and education of food handlers: critical appraisal of the literature.常规餐厅检查及食品从业人员教育效果的评估:文献的批判性评价
Can J Public Health. 1994 Jul-Aug;85 Suppl 1:S56-60.
3
Partner notification for sexually transmitted diseases: proposed practice guidelines.
Can J Public Health. 1994 Jul-Aug;85 Suppl 1:S53-5.
4
Routine restaurant inspections and education of food handlers: recommendations based on critical appraisal of the literature and survey of Canadian jurisdictions on restaurant inspections and education of food handlers.餐厅常规检查及食品从业人员教育:基于对相关文献的批判性评估以及对加拿大各司法管辖区餐厅检查和食品从业人员教育情况调查的建议
Can J Public Health. 1994 Jul-Aug;85 Suppl 1:S67-70.
5
A process for developing community consensus regarding the diagnosis and management of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder.一个就注意力缺陷/多动障碍的诊断和管理达成社区共识的过程。
Pediatrics. 2005 Jan;115(1):e97-104. doi: 10.1542/peds.2004-0953.
6
Immunization delivery methods: practice recommendations.免疫接种实施方法:实践建议
Can J Public Health. 1994 Jul-Aug;85 Suppl 1:S37-40.
7
The case for evidence-based practice standards.
Adv Wound Care. 1998 Jan-Feb;11(1):46.
8
9
Evaluation of clinical practice guidelines.临床实践指南的评估
CMAJ. 1995 Dec 1;153(11):1575-81.
10
Reducing obesity and related chronic disease risk in children and youth: a synthesis of evidence with 'best practice' recommendations.降低儿童和青少年肥胖及相关慢性病风险:证据综合与“最佳实践”建议
Obes Rev. 2006 Feb;7 Suppl 1:7-66. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-789X.2006.00242.x.

引用本文的文献

1
Inter-rater reliability of risk of bias tools for non-randomized studies.偏倚风险评估工具在非随机研究中的评价者间信度。
Syst Rev. 2023 Dec 7;12(1):227. doi: 10.1186/s13643-023-02389-w.
2
How well can we assess the validity of non-randomised studies of medications? A systematic review of assessment tools.我们能多好地评估药物非随机研究的有效性?评估工具的系统评价。
BMJ Open. 2021 Mar 24;11(3):e043961. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-043961.
3
The Biomechanics and Applications of Strongman Exercises: a Systematic Review.大力士运动的生物力学及其应用:一项系统综述。
Sports Med Open. 2019 Dec 9;5(1):49. doi: 10.1186/s40798-019-0222-z.
4
Blended learning models for introductory programming courses: A systematic review.混合式学习模式在入门编程课程中的应用:系统综述。
PLoS One. 2019 Sep 5;14(9):e0221765. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0221765. eCollection 2019.
5
Same or Different: The Overlap Between Children With Auditory Processing Disorders and Children With Other Developmental Disorders: A Systematic Review.相同还是不同:听觉处理障碍儿童与其他发育障碍儿童的重叠:系统评价。
Ear Hear. 2018 Jan/Feb;39(1):1-19. doi: 10.1097/AUD.0000000000000479.
6
The association between social support and physical activity in older adults: a systematic review.老年人社会支持与身体活动之间的关联:一项系统综述
Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2017 Apr 27;14(1):56. doi: 10.1186/s12966-017-0509-8.
7
Review of quality assessment tools for the evaluation of pharmacoepidemiological safety studies.用于评估药物流行病学安全性研究的质量评估工具综述
BMJ Open. 2012 Sep 25;2(5). doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2012-001362. Print 2012.
8
Improving the use of research evidence in guideline development: 14. Reporting guidelines.提高研究证据在指南制定中的应用:14. 报告指南。
Health Res Policy Syst. 2006 Dec 8;4:26. doi: 10.1186/1478-4505-4-26.
9
Systems for grading the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations I: critical appraisal of existing approaches The GRADE Working Group.证据质量和推荐强度分级系统I:对现有方法的批判性评价 循证医学分级工作组
BMC Health Serv Res. 2004 Dec 22;4(1):38. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-4-38.
10
A systematic review of the content of critical appraisal tools.对批判性评估工具内容的系统评价。
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2004 Sep 16;4:22. doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-4-22.