首页> 外文OA文献 >Methodological Quality Assessment of Review Articles Evaluating Interventions to Improve Microbial Food Safety
【2h】

Methodological Quality Assessment of Review Articles Evaluating Interventions to Improve Microbial Food Safety

机译:评价干预措施以改善微生物食品安全的评论文章的方法学质量评估

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Review articles are a means of summarizing the potentially vast volume of research on a topic. However, the methodological quality of review articles varies, and reviews on the same topic may reach different conclusions. We evaluated 65 review articles published between 2000 and 2005 that addressed the effectiveness of microbial food safety interventions, using criteria for methodological soundness developed in the medical field. Overall, the methodological quality of the review articles was poor, with none of the reviews providing information on the method of locating primary research studies or the inclusion/exclusion criteria for selecting primary studies. None of the reviews included a critical appraisal of the methodological quality of the primary studies. Less than half of the reviews stated a focused research question, explored possible reasons for differences in the results of primary studies, discussed the generalizability of results, or proposed directions for future research. There is a need to improve the methodological quality of review articles on microbial food safety interventions if they are to be of use in policy and decision making.
机译:评论文章是一种总结有关某个主题的潜在大量研究的方法。但是,评论文章的方法论质量各不相同,并且同一主题的评论可能会得出不同的结论。我们使用医学领域开发的方法健全性标准,评估了2000年至2005年发表的65篇评论文章,这些评论针对微生物食品安全干预措施的有效性。总体而言,评论文章的方法学质量较差,没有评论提供有关定位基础研究的方法或选择基础研究的纳入/排除标准的信息。这些评价均未包括对基础研究方法学质量的严格评估。不到一半的评论提出了重点研究问题,探讨了基础研究结果差异的可能原因,讨论了结果的可概括性,或提出了未来研究的方向。如果要在政策和决策中使用微生物食品安全干预措施的评论文章,则需要提高其方法学质量。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

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