期刊文献+

护理缺失量性研究报告规范及解读

Interpretation and Analysis of Strengthening Transparent Reporting of Research on Unfinished Nursing CARE:The RANCARE Guideline
下载PDF
导出
摘要 护理缺失现象在世界各地卫生保健环境中普遍存在,其对于患者、护士及医院都会造成不良影响,但有关护理缺失的相关研究在论文撰写时缺乏统一的报告规范,报告质量参差不齐,导致各研究者在比较各国医院、临床科室或其他保健系统的护理缺失研究结果时存在困难,不便读者理解该现象并意识到其重要性。Blatter等于2020年发表了《Strengthening transparent reporting of research on unfinished nursing CARE:The RANCARE guideline》即护理缺失量性研究的报告规范。本文就该报告规范产生的背景及内容进行解读,以期提升护理缺失相关研究的报告质量。 The phenomenon of unfinished nursing care is widespread in health care settings all over the world,and it will cause adverse effects on patients,nursing staff and hospitals.However,the lack of uniform reporting standards and uneven reporting quality of relevant studies on unfinished nursing care lead to difficulties for researchers in comparing the results of unfinished nursing care in hospitals,clinical departments or other health systems in different countries,which makes it difficult for readers to understand and realize the significance of this phenomenon.Swiss researcher Blatter published a paper entitled Strengthening Transparent Reporting of Research on Unfinished Nursing CARE:The RANCARE Guideline in 2020,which clarified reporting guideline of unfinished nursing care.This paper interprets and analyzes the background and content of the RANCARE guideline to help Chinese nursing scholars enhance the report quality of unfinished nursing care.
作者 阳莉 甘秀妮 吴佳倩 YANG Li;GAN Xiuni;WU Jiaqian(Nursing Department,The Second Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University,Chongqing 400010,China)
出处 《军事护理》 CSCD 北大核心 2023年第4期113-116,共4页 MILITARY NURSING
关键词 护理缺失 解读 量性研究 报告规范 unfinished nursing care interpretation quantitative study reporting guideline
  • 相关文献

参考文献3

二级参考文献38

  • 1王波,詹思延.如何撰写高质量的流行病学研究论文第一讲观察性流行病学研究报告规范——STROBE介绍[J].中华流行病学杂志,2006,27(6):547-549. 被引量:38
  • 2Moher D, Schulz KF, Ahman DG. The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomised trials. Lancet, 2001,357 ( 9263 ) : 1191-1194.
  • 3Ahman DG, Schulz KF, Moher D,et al. The revised CONSORT statement for reporting randomized trials: explanation and elaboration. Ann Intern Med,2001,134 ( 8 ) :663-694.
  • 4李立明,主编.流行病学,第6版.北京:人民卫生出版社,2006.128-163.
  • 5Matthews JN, Ahman DG. Statistics notes. Interaction 2: Compare effect sizes not P values. BMJ, 1996,313 (7060) :808.
  • 6Assmann SF, Pocock SJ, Enos LE,et al. Subgroup analysis and other (mis) uses of baseline data in clinical trials. Lancet ,2000, 355 ( 9209 ) : 1064-1069.
  • 7Wallen L, Swahn E, Kontny F, et al. Invasive compared with non-invasive treatment in unstable coronary-artery disease: FRISC Ⅱ prospective randomised multicentre study. FRagmin and Fast Revascularisation during InStability in Coronary artery disease Investigators. Lancet, 1999,354 ( 9180 ) : 708-715.
  • 8Ahman DG, Dore CJ. Randomisation and baseline comparisons in clinical trials. Lancet, 1990,335 ( 8682 ) : 149-153.
  • 9Lachin JM. Statistical considerations in the intent-to-treat principle. Control Clin Trials,2000,21 (3) : 167-189.
  • 10Kiviluoto T, Siren J, Luukkonen P,et al. Randomised trial of laparoscopic versus open chotecysteetomy for acute and gangrenous cholecystitis. Lancet, 1998,351 ( 9099 ) :321-325.

共引文献51

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