首页|指南临床问题重要性评级中的变异度评价及实例研究

指南临床问题重要性评级中的变异度评价及实例研究

扫码查看
目的 目前临床实践指南制订中变异性系数的应用局限于评估共识组对临床问题评分的一致性程度,对变异度的应用环节较为局限.本文旨在呈现指南制订实例中变异度评价的灵活应用及结果.方法 通过问卷调查进行大范围临床调研,并针对共识组进行两轮问卷调查及面对面共识会议.计算两个群体对于临床问题以及结局重要性评级的均值和变异性系数.通过SPSS和Microsoft Excel完成数据汇总分析.结果 共收集356份临床调研问卷,并在共识组中进行两轮问卷调查.临床调研及共识组第一轮调研中,不论所有临床问题总体重要性评分高低,变异性系数均大于25%.共识组第二轮结果发生较大变化,一方面,相比于第一轮结果,第二轮几乎所有临床问题变异性系数都变小,高优先级临床问题变异性系数小于25%,而变异性系数大于25%的临床问题为低优先级.针对结局重要性变异度,临床调研与共识组第一轮调研结果差别较小,非常重要结局的变异性系数小于30%,在共识组第二轮调研中,非常重要结局变异性均小于20%.结局的重要性等级程度越高,其变异性系数呈现出越小的趋势.结论 变异度评价的应用研究具有切实的方法学价值,可辅助临床问题及结局优先性选择,有利于充分考虑不同因素和价值观的影响,制订出高质量指南.
Variability evaluation and empirical study in the importance rating of clinical questions and outcomes in the development of guidelines
Objective The application of the coefficient of variation(CV)in the development of clinical practice guidelines is limited to evaluating the consistency of the consensus panel in clinical questions rating,and the application of variability was limited.This study presents the application and results of variability evaluation in the development of guidelines.Methods We conducted a large-scale clinical survey through questionnaire survey,and conducted two rounds of questionnaire survey and face-to-face consensus meeting for the consensus group.Means and CV were calculated for clinical questions and outcome importance ratings.We performed the summary and analysis by SPSS and Microsoft Excel.Results A total of 356 clinical survey questionnaires and two rounds survey in consensus panel were collected.We found that in the clinical survey and the first-round of the consensus panel,the CV was greater than 25%for all clinical questions regardless of the overall importance score.In the consensus panel,the results of the second-round were greatly changed.On the one hand,compared with the first-round,the CV of almost all clinical questions was smaller in the second-round,and the CV of high-priority clinical questions was less than 25%,while the clinical questions with a CV greater than 25%were of low-priority.In view of the CV of outcome importance,the clinical survey was similar to the results of the first-round of consensus panel.The CV of very important outcomes was less than 30%.In the second-round of consensus panel,the variability of very important outcomes was less than 20%.The higher the importance level of the outcome was,the smaller the CV was.Conclusion The study of variability evaluation has practical methodological value,which can assist clinical questions and outcomes priority selection,and help to fully consider the influence of different factors and values,and develop high-quality guidelines.

Clinical questionVariabilityOutcomeMethodologyClinical practice guideline

高一城、于子津、王雅琪、方锐、王程、李媛媛、邓迎杰、向文远、费宇彤

展开 >

北京中医药大学循证医学中心(北京 100029)

北京中医药大学国际循证中医药研究院(北京 100029)

北京GRADE中心(北京 100029)

北京中医药大学针灸推拿学院(北京 100029)

新疆医科大学附属中医医院(乌鲁木齐 830000)

展开 >

临床问题 变异性 结局 方法学 临床实践指南

新疆维吾尔自治区重点研发计划项目

2021B03006-4

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(10)