期刊文献+

卫生决策中对系统评价的十大认识误区 被引量:3

Top Ten Misunderstanding of Systematic Review in Health System Decisions
原文传递
导出
摘要 随着循证实践的蓬勃开展,系统评价证据越来越被视为决策的可靠依据,特别是在时间紧急,任务重要,且干扰因素多的情况下,其优势更为凸显。但在非医学领域中,对循证实践及系统评价作用的认知还存在一定局限性,许多认识误区阻碍了系统评价方法在卫生决策领域的推广与使用。本文以健康干预实践证据为例,探讨系统评价在卫生决策领域的作用,力图澄清这些认识误区,推动系统评价的发展。 With vigorous development of the Evidence-Based Practice (EBP), systematic review as a reliable basis for decision making is becoming more and more important, especially in emergent and significant situation under the influence of various interferences. But there are many misunderstandings and fallacies in systematic review beyond medi- cal field, which block the spread and application of systematic review in health system decisions. This paper takes the evi- dences of health intervention practice as examples, explores the functions of systematic review in health system decisions, tries to clarif7 these misunderstandings and fallacies, and so as to promote the development of systematic review.
作者 童峰 拜争刚
出处 《中国循证医学杂志》 CSCD 2013年第5期531-535,共5页 Chinese Journal of Evidence-based Medicine
基金 四川省统计科学研究计划项目(编号:2012sc136)
关键词 循证医学 系统评价 决策依据 卫生决策 循证实践 Evidence-based medicine Systematic review Decision basis Health system decision Evidence-based practice
  • 相关文献

参考文献42

  • 1Trinder L, Reynolds S. Evidence-based Practice: A Critical Apprais- al. Oxford: Blackwell Science, 2000: 17.
  • 2Walshe K, Rundall TG. Evidence-based management: From theory to practice in health care. Milbank Quarterly, 2001, 73: 429-457, IV-V.
  • 3Petticrew M. Systematic reviews from astronomy to zoology: mythsand misconceptions. BAll] (Clinical research ed.), 2001,322:98 - 101.
  • 4Mays N, Pope C, Popay J. Systematic reviewing qualitative and quantitative evidence to inform management and policy-making in the health field. ]ournal of Health Services Research Policy, 2005, 10(suppl_l): 6-20.
  • 5Lavis JN, Davies HT, Gruen RL, et al. Working within and beyond the Cochrane CoUaboration to make systematic reviews more useful to healthcare managers and policy makers. Healthcare Policy, 2006, 1: 21-33.
  • 6Lavis IN. How can we support the use of systematic reviews in poli- cymaking? PLOS Medicine, 2009, 6: e1000141.
  • 7Lavis J, Oxman A, Grimshaw J, et al. SUPPORT Tools for evidence- informed health Policymaking (STP) 7: Finding systematic reviews. Health research policy and systems Central [serial online], 2009 [cited 2011 Jun 10]; 7 Suppl 1: $7. Available from: http://www.ncbi. nlm.nih.govlpubmed/20018114.
  • 8Devereaux PJ, Choi PTL, Lacchetti C, et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing mortality rates of private for- profit and private not-for-profit hospitals. Canadian Medical Asso- ciation Journal, 2002, 166: 1399-1406.
  • 9Commission on the Future of Health Care in Canada. Building on Values: The Future of Health Care in Canada. Ottawa, Canada: 2002.
  • 10Lavis IN, Panisset U. EVIPNet Africa's first series of policy briefs to support evidence-informed policymaking. International ]ournal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 2010, 26: 229-232.

二级参考文献113

  • 1卫茂玲,刘鸣,苏维,牟焱明,李幼平.中文发表系统评价、Meta分析18年现状分析[J].华西医学,2007,22(4):697-698. 被引量:12
  • 2卫茂玲.Cochrane系统评价在中国的现状与问题[J].中国循证医学杂志,2006,6(2):150-151. 被引量:13
  • 3刘建平,夏芸.中文期刊发表的中医药系统综述或Meta-分析文章的质量评价[J].中国中西医结合杂志,2007,27(4):306-311. 被引量:59
  • 4GRADEpro. [Computer program]. Version 3.2 for Windows. Jan Brozek, Andrew Oxman, Holger Schünemann, 2008.
  • 5Jaeschke 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.
  • 6Porta M. Chief editor. A dictionary of epidemiology. Fifth Edition. New York: Oxford University Press, 2008: 217.
  • 7刘建平, 主编. 循证中医药研究方法. 第1版. 北京: 人民卫生出版社, 2009: 298-299.
  • 8Moher D, Soeken K, Sampson M, et al . Assessing the quality of reports of systematic reviews in pediatric complementary and alternative medicine. BMC Pediatr , 2002, 2(2): 1-3.
  • 9Jadad A, Moher M, Browman G, et al . Systematic reviews and meta-analyses on treatment of asthma: critical evaluation. BMJ , 2000, 321(7256): 537-540.
  • 10Jadad AR, Cook DJ, Jones A. Methodology and reports of systematic reviews and meta-analysis: a comparison of Cochrane paper-based journals. JAMA , 1998, 280(3): 278-280.

共引文献667

同被引文献45

引证文献3

二级引证文献22

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