Objective To assess the reporting quality of systematic reviews/meta-analyses related to interventions published in Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine by PRISMA guidelines, and to analyze its influencing factors. Methods The systematic reviews/meta-analyses related to interventions were searched in the Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine from its inception to 2011. The quality of the included reviews was assessed in accordance with the PRISMA checklist. Based on the degree of conformity with each criterion of PRISMA, the reviews were scored as “1”, “0.5” or “0” orderly. The data were put into Excel, and the Meta-analyst software was used for statistical analysi. Results Among all literature in the volume 11 (95) of the Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine from 2001 to 2011, a total of 379 studies were included, and the number of publication showed a yearly rising trend. The PRISMA scale score ranged from 8.5 to 26 (X±SD) was 19.97±3.15. Among all studies, 25 (6.60%) scored 21-27 points, which were regarded as the complete reporting; 226 (59.63%) scored 15-21 points, regarded as relatively complete reporting; and 128 (33.77%) scored less than 15 points, regarded as serious lack of information. The results of stratified analysis showed that, both the issue of PRISMA and fund support could improve the reporting quality, with a significant difference (Plt;0.05); and authors more than 3, authors from universities, and authors from more than 2 institutions could improve the reporting quality, but without a significant difference (Pgt;0.05). Conclusion The overall reporting quality of systematic reviews/meta-analyses related to interventions published in the Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine is poor, and it is influenced by the factors of protocol and registration, risk of bias across studies, other analyses, and fund support, which have to be taken seriously. The reasonable utilization of the PRISMA checklist will improve the reporting quality of systematic reviews/meta-analyses.
Objective To assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews or meta-analyses of intervention published in the Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine, so as to provide evidence for improving the domestic methodological quality. Methods The systematic reviews or meta-analyses of intervention published from 2001 to 2011 were identified by searching the Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine. The methodological quality of included studies was assessed by AMSTAR scale. The Excel software was used to input data, and Mata-Analyst software was used to conduct statistical analysis. Results A total of 379 studies were included. The average score of AMSTAR was 6.15±1.35 (1.5-9.5 point). Just some items of AMSTAR scale were influenced by the following features of included studies: publication date, funded or not, number of author, author’s unit, and number of author’s unit. The total AMSTAR score of studies published after 2008 was higher than those published before 2008 (P=0.02), but the improvement of methodological quality was limited. While the total AMSTAR score of studies published by 3 or more than 3 authors were higher than those published by 2 or less than 2 authors (P=0.04). Conclusion The methodological quality of the included studies published in the Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Pediatrics is uneven. Although the methodological quality improves somewhat after the publication of AMSTAR scale, there is no big progress, so it still needs to be further improved.
Objective Investigate the effectiveness of problem-based learning (PBL) in teaching of evidence-based medicine for undergraduates.Methods Participating students from four of eight classes with major of clinical medicine in Grade 2006 were assigned to the lecture-lased learning (LBL) group (50 students) and the PBL group (46 students), and each group had two classes. The examination scores, questionnaire, and seminars were used in combination to evaluate the teaching effectiveness. SPSS 11.5 software was used for statistical analyses. Results The baseline characteristics were balanced between the two groups because no difference was found in aspects of taking part in literature or information retrieval training, research project, undergraduate starting an undertaking plan and social survey, as well as getting known of evidence-based medicine, clinical epidemiology and PBL. The evaluation results of teaching effectiveness showed that, a) About the examination score, there was a significant difference between the two groups (Plt;0.05); the score of the PBL group was higher than that of the LBL group in aspects of fundamental knowledge, issuing question, retrieving evidence, evaluating evidence, applying evidence and total score; and b) About the attitude towards LML, there was a significant difference between the two groups about whether the LBL was beneficial or not to improve positive study, study interest, participation willingness, aggregate analysis ability, speech ability, self-study ability, information acquisition ability, information analyses and utilization ability, problem analyses and solving ability, combination of theory and clinic, communication between teachers and students, team cooperation and so on; but there was no significant difference between the two groups (Pgt;0.05) in aspects of improving learning efficiency, better understanding theory leader from class, improving writing ability and practicing ability; 97.83% of the students in the PBL group thought that PBL was suitable for themselves which should be introduced into other course teaching; 48.00% of the students in the LBL group thought that the current LBL teaching mode was not suitable for undergraduate, while 28.00% of the students in the LBL group thought that the current teaching mode should get reformed. Conclusion The PBL teaching mode is beneficial for undergraduates to better training clinical thinking, improve the ability of problem construction, aggregate analyses, literature retrieval, language express and exploratory innovation, and fully improve the quality of evidence-based medicine teaching. The PBL teaching method is suitable for teaching of evidence-based medicine for undergraduate medical students.
It is vital for disciplines to introduce their glossary in a standardized manner, and Evidence-Based Medicine is no exception. Unification and standardization for evidence-based medicine glossary are indispensable and urgent. This paper will introduce what is evidence-based medicine glossary and why it is important.
Objective To estimate the quality and efficacy of the academic thesis of compound anisodine in traumatic optic neuropathies(TON) treatment. Method We searched Chinese database last updated in April 2007 for published magazine papers using ldquo;anisodinerdquo; amp; ldquo;optic-neuropathyrdquo; amp; ldquo;traumardquo; or ldquo;blunt trauma rdquo; as key words，and analyzed them using the standard of evidence-based medicine (EBM)． Result 6 RCTs with a total of 415 eyes included are retrieved , and the OR value is 6.54 with a 95%CI of［4.14，10.35］，P＜0.00001, the difference is sig nificant; subcategory analyses are made and both show significant difference( P＜0.0001). Conclusion The existing evidence supports that prognosis of TON is better when compound anisodine are adopt in treatment, and this effect is significant in steroid treatment. Compound anisodine can be used alone for TON treatment. However, because there are only 6 thesis are retrieved and all of them have methodolo gical short-comings，the evidence is not convincing．There is an urgent need of well-planed, large-scale and multiple-center studies to assess the role of compound anisodine in traumatic optic neuropathies treatment． (Chin J Ocul Fundus Dis,2008,24:103-106)
Objective To assess the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) related to traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) published in the Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine by CONSORT statement and Jadad scale. Methods We handsearched the Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine to identify TCM RCTs. The revised CONSORT statement and Jadad scale combined with self-established criteria were applied. Results A total of 57 RCTs were identified of which there were 17 TCM RCTs. Some items in CONSORT checklist were completely reported in all TCM RCTs, such as abstract, inclusion and exclusion criteria, intervention, randomization sequence generation, description of statistic method, description of baseline data, outcomes and estimation, and explain results. Compared with the previous findings, there were more trials in this study to report allocation concealment, randomization implementation, use of flow chart and appliance. Only 3 RCTs (17.6%) reported acknowledgements. One RCT did not describe syndrome type of TCM, and 4 RCTs (23.5%) carried out dummy. The mean Jadad score was 4.35±1.11 in all trials, of which 11 RCTs (64.7) ranked 5 points. Conclusion The comprehensive quality of reporting of TCM RCTs published in the Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine from 2001 to 2008 has been improved. After the publication of CONSORT statement and CONSORT for traditional Chinese medicine, the quality of reporting of TCM RCTs is improved. We are looking forward to improving the CONSORT for TCM.
Objective To investigate the effect of problem-based learning (PBL) used in the course of evidencebasedmedicine.Methods Totally eight classes were randomly assigned to the lecture based learning (LBL) group(n=4) and PBL group (n=4). The examination scores, questionnaire, and seminars were used to evaluate the teaching effectiveness. SPSS 11.5 software was used for statistical analysis. Results More than 50% of students in each group believed that the teaching method of PBL could activate learning enthusiasm and interest, improve problem analysis and independent study abilities. There were significant differences between the two groups in terms of comprehensive analysis, learning efficiency, digesting the contents of study and strengthening the teacher-student communication, and whether or not to perform PBL teaching. Apart from single choice questions, other types of examination questions and total scores have significant differences. Conclusions The PBL teaching model can effectively train undergraduateclinical thinking, cultivate the abilities of deconstructing problem, comprehensive analysis, literature retrieval, language expression, exploration innovation; and overall improve the teaching quality of evidence based medicine.