首页> 外文OA文献 >Derivation of clinical indications for carotid endarterectomy by an expert panel.
【2h】

Derivation of clinical indications for carotid endarterectomy by an expert panel.

机译:由专家小组推导颈动脉内膜切除术的临床指征。

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

We used a two-round consensus panel method to derive and rate the appropriateness of comprehensive sets of detailed clinical indications for performing carotid endarterectomy. Before meeting, nine nationally influential physicians rated 675 indications; after review and discussion, they rated 864. The method did not force unanimity; our purposes were not only to encourage agreement but also to uncover areas of disagreement concerning the procedure's appropriate use. The panelists agreed on the level of appropriateness for 54 per cent of the final 864 indications and disagreed on 18 per cent. Ratings were reliably reproduced six to eight months after the completion of the process. The physicians' indications and ratings were consistent with those in the literature, and statistical analysis demonstrated that they followed logical clinical rationale. We conclude that consensus methods that do not force agreement can be used with panels of physicians to produce detailed, reliable, and valid indications. They can also identify medically controversial reasons for using a procedure that can serve as a starting point for a research agenda.
机译:我们使用了两轮共识小组方法来得出并评估进行颈动脉内膜切除术的详细临床指征的综合设置的适当性。会议之前,有9位具有全国影响力的医师对675项适应症进行了评分;经过审查和讨论,他们的评分为864。我们的目的不仅是鼓励达成共识,而且还发现有关程序正确使用的分歧之处。小组成员对最后864项适应症中54%的适用性达成了一致,不同意18%。该过程完成后的六到八个月,可靠地重现了评级。医生的适应症和等级与文献中的一致,并且统计分析表明它们遵循逻辑上的临床原理。我们得出结论,可以与医师小组一起使用不会强制达成共识的共识方法来产生详细,可靠和有效的适应症。他们还可以找出医学上有争议的原因,以使用可以作为研究议程起点的程序。

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