2011～2013年国内三本麻醉学期刊随机对照试验文献质量评价

发布时间：2019-02-12 20:13

【摘要】：目的了解近年来国内具有代表性的三本麻醉学专业期刊随机对照试验(RCT)文献的质量。方法本研究采用CONSORT清单对《中华麻醉学杂志》、《临床麻醉学杂志》和《国际麻醉学与复苏杂志》2011~2013年发表的所有RCT文献质量进行评价。结果本研究共纳入RCT文献1024篇,占发表文献总数的29.9%。纳入的文献中,科学背景、试验设计描述、受试者合格标准、干预措施的描述、统计学方法和不良反应等报告率达100%。而在重要方法的改变、设定主要和次要结局指标、主要指标的效应估计值等方面报告率为0。仅有13篇(1.3%)文献可以从文题中看出是否为RCT文献。仅有3篇(0.3%)文献有介绍如何计算样本量。有464(45.3%)文献报道了随机序列的产生方法。但仅有5篇(0.5%)有对随机方法类型的描述。只有9篇(0.9%)文献能在方法中看出使用了分配隐藏机制。盲法的使用要多一些,有69篇(6.7%)。介绍招募时间的文献只有148篇(14.5%)。基线表格的使用超过半数,有559篇(54.6%)。讨论中提及试验的局限性的文献有855篇(83.5%)。结论国内麻醉学期刊的RCT文献报告质量与CONSORT声明要求相比有较大差距,国内期刊应尽快采纳CONSORT,提高麻醉学文献的报告质量和科研水平。
[Abstract]:Objective to investigate the quality of (RCT) literature in three representative journals of anesthesiology in recent years. Methods the quality of all RCT literatures published in the Chinese Journal of Anesthesiology, the Journal of Clinical Anesthesiology and the International Journal of Anesthesiology and Resuscitation from 2011 to 2013 was evaluated by CONSORT list. Results A total of 1024 RCT papers were included in this study, accounting for 29. 9% of the published literature. In the literature, the scientific background, the design description of the experiment, the qualification criteria of the subjects, the description of the intervention measures, the statistical method and the adverse reaction, the reporting rate was 100%. However, the reporting rate is 0. 5% in terms of the change of important methods, the setting of primary and secondary outcome indicators, and the estimation of the effects of the main indicators. Only 13 articles (1.3%) can be identified as RCT. Only 3 articles (0.3%) showed how to calculate the sample size. 464 (45.3%) literature reported the method of generating random sequences. However, only 5 (0.5%) have a description of the type of random method. Only 9 articles (0.9%) showed the use of allocation hiding mechanism in the method. Blind methods were used more frequently, 69 (6.7%). There were only 148 articles (14.5%) on the time of recruitment. More than half of the baseline tables were used, with 559 articles (54.6%). There were 855 articles (83.5%) referring to the limitations of the experiment in the discussion. Conclusion compared with the requirement of CONSORT, the quality of RCT literature report in domestic anesthesiology journals is much lower than that of CONSORT. CONSORT, should be adopted as soon as possible to improve the reporting quality and scientific research level of anesthesiology literature.
【作者单位】：南京医科大学第一附属医院麻醉科;《临床麻醉学杂志》编辑部;
【分类号】：R614

【参考文献】