期刊文献+

改良版定量系统评价证据分级方法对患者报告结局测量工具的评价 被引量:25

Modified GRADE Evaluation of COSMIN Method for Patient Reported Outcome Measures
下载PDF
导出
摘要 目的介绍基于共识选择健康测量工具的标准(consensus-based standards for the selection of health measurement instruments,COSMIN)而改良的定量系统评价证据分级(the grading of recommendations assessment,development and evaluation,GRADE)方法,以帮助国内研究者更全面地认识与应用COSMIN评价体系。方法翻译COSMIN用户手册与阅读文献,将COSMIN改良版GRADE方法与传统GRADE法相比较分析。结果COSMIN基于传统GRADE法对其进行个性化改良,针对患者报告结局测量工具的特点更好地调整与说明了评价流程与方法。结论研究者应遵循COSMIN评价体系,规范患者报告结局测量工具系统评价的制作过程,提高研究质量。 Objective To introduce the modified the grading of recommendations assessment,development and evaluation(GRADE)method of Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health measurement instruments(COSMIN)to help domestic researchers to understand and apply COSMIN evaluation system comprehensively.Methods The modified GRADE method of COSMIN was compared with the traditional GRADE method by translating COSMIN user manual and reviewing literature.Results COSMIN made personalized improvement based on the traditional GRADE method,and adjusted the evaluation process and method better according to the characteristics of patient reported outcome measures(PROMs).Conclusions Researchers should follow the COSMIN evaluation system,standardize the process of PROMs producing and improve the quality of study.
作者 陈祎婷 沈蓝君 彭健 胡雁 余桂星 李铮 CHEN Yiting;SHEN Lanjun;PENG Jian;HU Yan;YU Guixing;LI Zheng(School of Nursing,Fudan University,Shanghai 200032,China;Evidence-Based Nursing Center,Fudan University,Shanghai 200032, China;Huadong Hospital,Fudan University,Shanghai 200040,China;Xiang’an Hospital,Xiamen University,Xiamen 361102,Fujian Province,China)
出处 《解放军护理杂志》 CSCD 北大核心 2020年第10期57-60,共4页 Nursing Journal of Chinese People's Liberation Army
基金 复旦大学复星护理科研基金(FNF201929)。
关键词 共识选择健康测量工具的标准 改良的定量系统评价证据分级 证据质量等级 推荐意见 consensus-based standards for the selection of health measurement instruments modified the grading of recommendations assessment development and evaluation grading of evidence quality recommendation
  • 相关文献

参考文献4

二级参考文献40

  • 1文进,李幼平.Meta分析中效应尺度指标的选择[J].中国循证医学杂志,2007,7(8):606-613. 被引量:129
  • 2Field M, Lohr K. Clinical practice guidelines: directions for a new program. Washington, DC: National Academic Press; 1990.
  • 3Schunemann HJ, Woodhead M, Anzueto A, et al. A vision statement on guideline development for respiratory disease: the example of COPD. Lancet, 2009, 373: 774-779.
  • 4Guyatt G, Vist G, Falck-Ytter Y, et al. An emerging consensus on grading recommendations? ACP J Club, 2006, 144(1): A8-9.
  • 5Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Kunz R, et al. Incorporating considerations of resources use into grading recommendations. BMJ, 2008, 336: 1170-1173.
  • 6Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Vist GE, et al. GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ, 2008, 336: 924-926.
  • 7Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Kunz R, et al. What is "quality of evidence" and why is it important to clinicians? BMJ, 2008, 336: 995-998.
  • 8Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Kunz R, et al. Going from evidence to recommendations. BMJ, 2008, 336:1049-1051.
  • 9Schunemann HI, Oxman AD, Brozek l, et al. Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations for diagnostic tests and strategies. BMJ, 2008, 336:1106-1110.
  • 10Jaeschke R, Guyatt GH, Dellinger P, et al. Use of GRADE grid to reach decisions on clinical practice guidelines when consensus is elusive. BMJ, 2008, 337: a744.

共引文献350

同被引文献221

引证文献25

二级引证文献138

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部