首页|中国中医药指南与共识的科学性、透明性和适用性评价(2022年)

中国中医药指南与共识的科学性、透明性和适用性评价(2022年)

扫码查看
目的 对中医药指南与共识进行评价,以期反映中医药指南与共识的质量及现状,促进中医药指南与共识的质量提升.方法 系统收集2022年医学期刊发表的中医药领域指南与共识,采用科学性、透明性和适用性评级工具(STAR)进行评价,分析得分率(%)情况,通过对比、分层等方法分析指南与共识的质量水平与影响因素.结果 共纳入130篇中医药指南与共识.指南得分率较高的领域依次为推荐意见(65.3%)、证据(55.9%)、工作组(54.2%).共识得分率较高的领域依次是推荐意见(38.7%)、工作组(37.0%)、资助(30.0%).中医药指南总得分率高于全国指南,共识低于全国共识;中医药指南的各领域得分率均高于共识;分层分析提示在各发表期刊、发布机构之间的指南得分率差异有统计学意义,在各发表期刊、制订机构、学科专业及资助类别之间的共识得分率差异有统计学意义.结论 中医药指南与共识的数量与质量持续提高,且中医药指南质量水平高于共识.中医药指南总体质量高于全国指南,并重点关注指南制订的科学性,共识总体质量低于全国共识;不同发表期刊、制订机构、学科专业及资助类别等是影响中医药指南与共识质量的潜在因素.
Evaluation of the scientificity,transparency,and applicability of Chinese traditional medicine guidelines and consensus(2022)
Objective To evaluate quality and current status of traditional Chinese medicine(TCM)guidelines and consensus,and to promote the improvements in the quality of guidelines and consensus.Methods A systematic collection of TCM guidelines and consensus published in medical journals in 2022 was conducted.We used scientific,transparent,and applicable ranking tools(STAR)for evaluation,analyzed the scoring rates(%),and assessed the quality level and influencing factors of guidelines and consensus through methods such as comparison and stratification.Results A total of 130 TCM guidelines and consensus were included.Guideline areas with higher scores included recommendations(65.3%),evidence(55.9%),and guideline development groups(54.2%).In the case of consensus,higher scores were observed in recommendations(38.7%),guideline development groups(37.0%),and funding(30.0%).The total score rate of TCM guidelines exceeded that of national guidelines,while the consensus rate was lower.Stratified analysis revealed statistical differences in guideline score rates among journals and issuing institutions,as well as significant differences in consensus score rates among journals,formulation institutions,subjects,and funding categories.Conclusion The quantity and quality of TCM guidelines and consensus are on a positive trajectory,with higher quality levels in guidelines than in consensus.The overall quality of TCM guidelines surpasses that of national guidelines,particularly emphasizing the scientificity of guideline formulation.However,the overall quality of consensus remains lower than that of the national consensus.Factors such as journals,formulation institutions,subjects,and funding categories are identified as potential influences on the quality of TCM guidelines and consensus.

Traditional Chinese medicineGuidelinesConsensusEvaluation

张娈、王洋洋、王旭、谢润生、李肃、陈耀龙、李慧

展开 >

广州中医药大学第二临床医学院(广州 510120)

广东省中医院(广州 510120)

中医证候全国重点实验室/中医药标准化研究团队,广州中医药大学第二附属医院(广州 510006)

重庆医科大学附属儿童医院(重庆 400014)

兰州大学健康数据科学研究院(兰州 730000)

世界卫生组织指南实施与知识转化合作中心(兰州 730000)

展开 >

中医药 指南 共识 评价

国家自然科学基金广东省医学科学技术研究项目

72204061B2021466

2024

中国循证医学杂志
四川大学

中国循证医学杂志

CSTPCD北大核心
影响因子:1.761
ISSN:1672-2531
年,卷(期):2024.24(8)