2021年期刊发表中国泌尿外科疾病专家共识的科学性、透明性和适用性评价  被引量:7

Scientificity,transparency and applicability of Chinese consensuses on urological diseases published in 2021

在线阅读下载全文

作  者:王伟 杨楠[4,5,6] 刘辉 刘萧 万小祥 焦伟 施国伟 陈耀龙 黄进[7] WANG Wei;YANG Nan;LIU Hui;LIU Xiao;WAN Xiaoxiang;JIAO Wei;SHI Guowei;CHEN Yaolong;HUANG Jin(Department of Urology,the Fifth People’s Hospital of Shanghai,Fudan University,Shanghai 200240,P.R.China;Fudan Institute of Urology,Fudan University,Shanghai 200040,P.R.China;Center of Evidence-based Medicine,Fudan University,Shanghai 200032,P.R.China;Research Unit of Evidence-Based Evaluation and Guidelines,Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences,Lanzhou 730000,P.R.China;World Health Organization Collaborating Centre for Guideline Implementation and Knowledge Translation,Lanzhou 730000,P.R.China;School of Basic Medical Sciences,Lanzhou University,Lanzhou 730000,P.R.China;Medical Device Regulatory Research and Evaluation Centre,West China Hospital,Sichuan University,Chengdu 610041,P.R.China)

机构地区:[1]复旦大学附属上海市第五人民医院泌尿外科,上海200240 [2]复旦大学泌尿外科研究所,上海200040 [3]复旦大学循证医学中心,上海200032 [4]中国医学科学院循证评价与指南研究创新单元,兰州730000 [5]世界卫生组织指南实施与知识转化合作中心,兰州730000 [6]兰州大学基础医学院,兰州730000 [7]四川大学华西医院医疗器械监管研究与评价中心,成都610041

出  处:《中国循证医学杂志》2023年第6期702-707,共6页Chinese Journal of Evidence-based Medicine

基  金:上海市医学重点专科基金项目(编号:ZK2019A03);复旦大学上海医学院毕业后医学教育研究课题项目(编号:FDYXYBJ-20222010)。

摘  要:目的对2021年期刊发表的中国泌尿外科疾病专家共识的科学性、透明性和适用性进行评价。方法计算机检索PubMed、CBM、CNKI、WanFang Data数据库和相关网站,搜集中国泌尿外科疾病专家共识,检索时限均为2021年1月至12月。采用科学性、透明性和适用性评级(STAR)工具进行评分,采用描述性方法分析专家共识评价结果。结果共纳入28篇专家共识。总分最高32.3分,最低9.9分,平均17.3±6.3分。参评共识在列出参与人员机构、提供能明确识别的推荐意见、说明推荐意见实施的注意事项、推荐意见有明确的参考文献、报告不足或未来研究方向等条目得分较高。但仅14.3%的共识报告了共识形成方法,未注重共识过程记录、考虑证据质量以外的其他因素如患者偏好、价值观与费用等;无共识在方法学部分说明参与人员的分工和职责;无共识纳入指南方法学或循证医学专家;无共识提供了详细的利益冲突管理办法;较少共识说明未受资助影响;较少共识提供了临床问题收集、遴选的方法;研究空白报告不清晰或不规范。结论作为一种医疗指导文件,中国泌尿外科疾病专家共识发挥着积极的作用,未来可进一步在共识方法、工作组、利益冲突、资助、临床问题、研究空白等领域提升共识质量。Objective To evaluate the scientificity,transparency and applicability of the Chinese consensuses on urological diseases published in 2021.Methods PubMed,CBM,CNKI,WanFang Data databases and related websites were electronically searched to collect Chinese consensuses on urological diseases from January 1 to December 31,2021.Each consensus was scored with the scientific,transparent,and applicable rating(STAR)tools,and analyzed by using descriptive methods.Results A total of 28 Chinese consensuses were included.The STAR scores ranged from 9.9 to 32.3 with a mean of 17.3±6.3.The included consensus had a high score ratio in the items such as listing participants and institutions,providing identifiable recommendations,explaining the precautions for implementation of recommendations,having corresponding references for recommendations,and reporting future research directions.However,only 14.3%reported the methodology of consensus formation,and the record of consensus process and consideration of patient preferences,values and costs were not noted.No consensus reported responsibilities of panel specialists in the method section or included experts in the field of guideline methodology or evidence-based medicine.No consensus reported detailed information in managing conflicts of interest.Few reported no affection by funding.No consensus reported methods for collecting and selecting clinical questions,or evaluating,summarizing and grading evidence.Research gaps were not reported in a clear or standardized way.Conclusion As a medical guidance document,expert consensus still plays an important role now in China.The quality of consensus on urological diseases can be further improved in methods of consensus formation,working groups,conflicts of interest,funding,accessibility,clinical questions,retrieval and evaluation of evidence,research gap,etc.

关 键 词:泌尿外科 专家共识 临床实践指南 评价 

分 类 号:R69[医药卫生—泌尿科学] G353.1[医药卫生—外科学]

 

参考文献:

正在载入数据...

 

二级参考文献:

正在载入数据...

 

耦合文献:

正在载入数据...

 

引证文献:

正在载入数据...

 

二级引证文献:

正在载入数据...

 

同被引文献:

正在载入数据...

 

相关期刊文献:

正在载入数据...

相关的主题
相关的作者对象
相关的机构对象