论文部分内容阅读
临床研究论文中提示其结论可靠性的信息由完成的观察与研究使用的可靠的观察方法所支持,这对于审稿人与读者都有特别的意义.早期,Gifford及Feinstein,Lionel及Herxheimer报道了使用明确标准评价临床试验,随后Sack-ett等归纳了回答临床试验“试验结果是真实的吗?”,“试验结果是有用的吗?”等问题的总的标准.继上述作者之后,对临床试验报道又发表过审稿人认为对研究的真实性有重要关系的各种评价标准,其中很多系近期发表的.虽然,这些标准很多方面看来与统计学的考虑有关,但更多的是在统计学的狭小角度以外的问题,并且用不同方法提出了评价论文的指导原则,其中很有用的方法之一是《英国医学杂志》提供给审稿人的评价标准清单.这些标准对审稿人有用,对进行试验的设计、实施与结果分析的研究者则更加有用,因为在撰写论文时才发现研究工作的缺陷则为时太晚.为了帮助读者去评价已发表的文章和改进自己的研究工作,下表列出修订过的上述《英国医学杂志》的评价表.
The information in the clinical research paper that suggests the reliability of its conclusions is supported by reliable observation of the conclusions and research used, which is of particular interest to reviewers and readers. Earlier, Gifford and Feinstein, Lionel and Herxheimer reported Using a definitive standard to evaluate the clinical trial, Sack et et al subsequently summarized the general criteria for answering the clinical trial “Is the test result true?” And “Is the test result useful?” Following the above authors, Test reports also publish various evaluation criteria that reviewers consider to be important to the authenticity of the study, many of which have been published recently. Although many of these criteria appear to be related to statistical considerations, more One of the most useful ways to address the issues outside the narrow statistical point of view and in different ways is to use a compendium of evaluation criteria provided to reviewers by the British Medical Journal. Useful for humans, and more useful for investigators who design, implement, and analyze the results of the study as they only found defects in research work when writing papers It is too late. In order to help the reader to evaluate published articles and improve their work, the following table lists the revised “British Medical Journal” evaluation table.