Suppr超能文献

[科学出版物批判性分析教学的效果如何?研究及其方法学质量综述]

[How effective is the teaching of critical analysis of scientific publications? Review of studies and their methodological quality].

作者信息

Audet N, Gagnon R, Ladouceur R, Marcil M

机构信息

Unité de médecine familiale, hôpital Laval, Québec.

出版信息

CMAJ. 1993 Mar 15;148(6):945-52.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate studies assessing the effectiveness of teaching critical appraisal of the literature to medical students. DATA SOURCES: French and English articles published between 1980 and 1990 indexed on MEDLINE or FAMLI as well as articles identified from the bibliographies. STUDY SELECTION: Studies were evaluated if the subjects were undergraduate or postgraduate medical students and if the teaching intervention was aimed at improving one or more of the following areas: knowledge in clinical epidemiology and biostatistics, reading habits and ability to critically appraise a scientific article. DATA EXTRACTION: The methodologic quality of the articles was assessed by three evaluators, who used a modified version of Poynard's checklist to assign a score. Articles with a score of 60% or more were considered satisfactory. The reliability of the checklist was evaluated by means of the kappa (kappa) coefficient and a coefficient of intraclass correlation. DATA SYNTHESIS: For the three evaluators the mean kappa coefficient was 0.33 and the coefficient of intraclass correlation 0.70. Five of the 10 studies had an overall score of 60% or higher. The quality of the individual sections of the articles varied: purpose of the study 85%, description of the population 58%, methods 44%, analysis of results 50%, and conclusions 90%. CONCLUSIONS: The effectiveness of teaching critical appraisal of the literature remains uncertain. More rigorous methods are needed in research in this area.

摘要

目的

评估关于向医学生传授文献批判性评价有效性的研究。数据来源:1980年至1990年间发表在MEDLINE或FAMLI上的法语和英语文章,以及从参考文献中识别出的文章。研究选择:如果研究对象为本科或研究生医学生,且教学干预旨在改善以下一个或多个方面,则对研究进行评估:临床流行病学和生物统计学知识、阅读习惯以及批判性评价科学文章的能力。数据提取:由三名评估人员评估文章的方法学质量,他们使用Poynard清单的修改版来打分。得分60%或更高的文章被认为是令人满意的。通过kappa(kappa)系数和组内相关系数评估清单的可靠性。数据综合:对于三名评估人员,平均kappa系数为0.33,组内相关系数为0.70。10项研究中有5项的总体得分在60%或更高。文章各部分的质量各不相同:研究目的85%,人群描述58%,方法44%,结果分析50%,结论90%。结论:文献批判性评价教学的有效性仍不确定。该领域的研究需要更严格的方法。

相似文献

引用本文的文献

4
Teaching critical appraisal skills in healthcare settings.在医疗环境中教授批判性评估技能。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011 Nov 9;2011(11):CD001270. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001270.pub2.

本文引用的文献

2
Teaching residents to read the medical literature.教住院医师阅读医学文献。
J Med Educ. 1980 Apr;55(4):362-5. doi: 10.1097/00001888-198004000-00007.
6
A checklist system for critical review of medical literature.医学文献批判性综述的清单系统。
Med Educ. 1985 Sep;19(5):392-5. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2923.1985.tb01343.x.

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