...
首页> 外文期刊>BMJ: British medical journal >Analysis of quality of interventions in systematic reviews
【24h】

Analysis of quality of interventions in systematic reviews

机译:质量分析系统的干预措施评论

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

Randomised controlled trials provide the best test of the efficacy of preventive or therapeutic interventions because they can separate the effects of the intervention from those of extraneous factors such as natural recovery and statistical regression. When more than one trial has examined a particular intervention, systematic reviews potentially provide the best summaries of the available evidence.Systematic reviewers can summarise findings of randomised trials using an impressionistic approach (qualitative synthesis) or they can produce quantitative syntheses by statistically combining the results from several studies (meta-analysis). Regardless of the method used, most systematic reviewers seek to reduce data from clinical trials into simple statements about treatment. Systematic reviews that provide succinct statements about the effects of an intervention are particularly useful to clinicians. But simple summaries are possible only when the studies address similar questions in similar ways.
机译:随机对照试验提供最好的测试预防或治疗的疗效干预,因为他们可以分离干预的效果外部因素,如自然恢复统计回归。研究了一个特定的干预,系统评价可能提供最好的摘要可用的证据。评论者可以总结随机的结果试验使用一个给人深刻印象的方法(定性的合成)或他们可以生产定量统计相结合的综合体几项研究的结果(分析)。不管采用何种方法,大多数系统评论家试图减少临床数据治疗试验成简单的语句。提供简洁的系统评价陈述一个干预的影响对临床医生尤其有用。可能只有当研究摘要以类似的方式解决类似的问题。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号