Evaluation Method for Medical Literature Applicability_Chinese Journal of Clinical Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery

Authors：

GAO Qiang , MO Xiaopei , CHEN Longqi.

1. Department of Thoracic Surgery， West China Hospital， Sichuan University， Chengdu 610041， P. R. China;;
2. West China School of Medicine， Sichuan University， Chengdu 610041， P. R. China）;

Corresponding author：

Keywords：

Medical literature; Clinical applicability; Clinical evidence; Consistency checking; Evidence-based Medicine

DOI：

10.7507/1007-4848.20130057

Video：

Export PDF Favorites Scan Get Citation

Abstract Full text Figures/Tables Video References Cited by

Objective To investigate an evaluation method of medical literature applicability to clinical work， and provide　a convenient way for physicians to search for the best evidence. Methods Delphi method was used to choose appropriate evaluating indexes， analytic hierarchy process was performed to determine the weighing of each index， and the formula to calculate medical literature applicability was formed. The practicability of this formula was evaluated by consistency checking　between the formula’s results and experts’ opinions on literature applicability. Results Five evaluating indexes were determined， including literature’s publishing year （X1）， whether the target questions were covered （X2）, sample size （X3）， trial category （X4）， and journal level （X5）. The formula to calculate medical literature applicability was Y=3.93 X1＋11.78 X2＋14.83 X3＋44.53 X4＋24.93 X5. The result of consistency checking showed that the formula’s results were highly consistent　with experts’ opinions （Kappa=0.75， P＜0.001）. Conclusion The applicability formula is a valuable tool to evaluate medical literature applicability.

Citation： GAO Qiang,MO Xiaopei,CHEN Longqi.. Evaluation Method for Medical Literature Applicability. Chinese Journal of Clinical Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, 2013, 20(2): 188-191. doi: 10.7507/1007-4848.20130057 Copy

1.	Bastian H， Glasziou P， Chalmers I. Seventy-five trials and eleven systematic reviews a day：how will we ever keep up ? PLoS Med， 2010， 7 （9）：e1000326.
2.	吴泰相，李幼平，张鸣明，等. 全球化时代的证据：Cochrane协作网对世界的贡献. 中国循证医学杂志， 2008， 8 （12）：1029-1031.
3.	International Committee of Medical Journal Editors （ICMJE）， Laine C， Horton R， et al. Clinical trial registration：looking back and moving ahead. Ann Intern Med， 2007， 169 （26）：2505-2506.
4.	Moores KG. Incorporating Evidence-Based Medicine into Clinical Practice：Practical Tools for Information Mastery. ASHP Midyear Clinical Meeting. 2010.
5.	费宇彤，刘建平. 第二讲：随机对照试验. 中国循证儿科杂志， 2009， 4 （3）：311-313.
6.	Linstone HA， Turoff M， Chief editor. The Delphi Method：Techniques　and Applications. Menlo Park, CA：Addison-Wesley Educational　Publishers Inc. U. S. 1975. 18-22.
7.	Saaty TL， Chief editor. Multicriteria decision making The Analytic Hierarch Process. Pittsburgh， PA：RWS Publications. 1996. 128-131.
8.	林君燕，洪伟，吴承祯，等. 基于h指数的科研人员学术评价及其相关性分析. 福建农林大学学报：哲学社会科学版， 2012， 15 （3）：58-63.
9.	Aznar J， Guerrero E. Analysis of the h-index and proposal of a new bibliometric index：the global index. Rev Clin Esp， 2011， 211 （5）：251-256.
10.	陈耀龙，李幼平，杜亮，等. 医学研究中证据分级和推荐强度的演进. 中国循证医学杂志， 2008， 8 （2）：127-133.
11.	Atkins D， Best D， Briss PA， et al. Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. Br Med J， 2004， 328 （7454）：1490.
12.	Evidence OD. Opinion：finding the proper balance. Curr Opin Obstet　Gynecol， 2012， 24 （4）：201-202.
13.	李幼平，主编. 循证医学. 北京：高等教育出版社. 2003. 3-6.
14.	Burke D， Phillips LF. A valid measure of the impact of research published in clinical neurophysiology and muscle & nerve ? Muscle & Nerve， 2012， 46 （3）：309-312.
15.	孙振球，徐勇勇，主编. 医学统计学（研究生用）. 北京：人民卫生出版社. 2002. 623-627.
16.	刘爱忠，孙振球. 应该辩证地对待循证医学. 医学与哲学， 2003， 24 （6）：27-28.

1. 　Bastian H， Glasziou P， Chalmers I. Seventy-five trials and eleven systematic reviews a day：how will we ever keep up ? PLoS Med， 2010， 7 （9）：e1000326.
2. 　吴泰相，李幼平，张鸣明，等. 全球化时代的证据：Cochrane协作网对世界的贡献. 中国循证医学杂志， 2008， 8 （12）：1029-1031.
3. 　International Committee of Medical Journal Editors （ICMJE）， Laine C， Horton R， et al. Clinical trial registration：looking back and moving ahead. Ann Intern Med， 2007， 169 （26）：2505-2506.
4. 　Moores KG. Incorporating Evidence-Based Medicine into Clinical Practice：Practical Tools for Information Mastery. ASHP Midyear Clinical Meeting. 2010.
5. 　费宇彤，刘建平. 第二讲：随机对照试验. 中国循证儿科杂志， 2009， 4 （3）：311-313.
6. 　Linstone HA， Turoff M， Chief editor. The Delphi Method：Techniques　and Applications. Menlo Park, CA：Addison-Wesley Educational　Publishers Inc. U. S. 1975. 18-22.
7. 　Saaty TL， Chief editor. Multicriteria decision making The Analytic Hierarch Process. Pittsburgh， PA：RWS Publications. 1996. 128-131.
8. 　林君燕，洪伟，吴承祯，等. 基于h指数的科研人员学术评价及其相关性分析. 福建农林大学学报：哲学社会科学版， 2012， 15 （3）：58-63.
9. 　Aznar J， Guerrero E. Analysis of the h-index and proposal of a new bibliometric index：the global index. Rev Clin Esp， 2011， 211 （5）：251-256.
10. 　陈耀龙，李幼平，杜亮，等. 医学研究中证据分级和推荐强度的演进. 中国循证医学杂志， 2008， 8 （2）：127-133.
11. 　Atkins D， Best D， Briss PA， et al. Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. Br Med J， 2004， 328 （7454）：1490.
12. Evidence OD. Opinion：finding the proper balance. Curr Opin Obstet　Gynecol， 2012， 24 （4）：201-202.
13. 　李幼平，主编. 循证医学. 北京：高等教育出版社. 2003. 3-6.
14. 　Burke D， Phillips LF. A valid measure of the impact of research published in clinical neurophysiology and muscle & nerve ? Muscle & Nerve， 2012， 46 （3）：309-312.
15. 　孙振球，徐勇勇，主编. 医学统计学（研究生用）. 北京：人民卫生出版社. 2002. 623-627.
16. 　刘爱忠，孙振球. 应该辩证地对待循证医学. 医学与哲学， 2003， 24 （6）：27-28.

Previous Article
Curative Effect of Endovascular Angioplasty in Treatment for Iliofemoral Venous Post-Thrombotic Syndrome
Next Article
《中国普外基础与临床杂志》对投稿文章中图表的要求

Chinese Journal of Clinical Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery

Evaluation Method for Medical Literature Applicability

Abstract Full text Figures/Tables Video References Cited by

Previous Article

Next Article

Format

Content