实验流行病学文献评阅.pptVIP

  1. 1、原创力文档(book118)网站文档一经付费(服务费),不意味着购买了该文档的版权,仅供个人/单位学习、研究之用,不得用于商业用途,未经授权,严禁复制、发行、汇编、翻译或者网络传播等,侵权必究。。
  2. 2、本站所有内容均由合作方或网友上传,本站不对文档的完整性、权威性及其观点立场正确性做任何保证或承诺!文档内容仅供研究参考,付费前请自行鉴别。如您付费,意味着您自己接受本站规则且自行承担风险,本站不退款、不进行额外附加服务;查看《如何避免下载的几个坑》。如果您已付费下载过本站文档,您可以点击 这里二次下载
  3. 3、如文档侵犯商业秘密、侵犯著作权、侵犯人身权等,请点击“版权申诉”(推荐),也可以打举报电话:400-050-0827(电话支持时间:9:00-18:30)。
  4. 4、该文档为VIP文档,如果想要下载,成为VIP会员后,下载免费。
  5. 5、成为VIP后,下载本文档将扣除1次下载权益。下载后,不支持退款、换文档。如有疑问请联系我们
  6. 6、成为VIP后,您将拥有八大权益,权益包括:VIP文档下载权益、阅读免打扰、文档格式转换、高级专利检索、专属身份标志、高级客服、多端互通、版权登记。
  7. 7、VIP文档为合作方或网友上传,每下载1次, 网站将根据用户上传文档的质量评分、类型等,对文档贡献者给予高额补贴、流量扶持。如果你也想贡献VIP文档。上传文档
查看更多
实验流行病学文献评阅

实验流行病学文献评阅 曾芳芳 流行病学教研室 A. Description of the evidence 证据的描述 What was the study design and how to collect data we need? What was the study population? What was the exposure? What was the outcome? What was the main result? B. Internal validity — consideration of non-causal explanations 内部真实性——考虑是否有非因果解释 Are the results likely to be affected by selection bias? 是否由于选择偏移所致 Are the results likely to be affected by observation bias? 是否由于观察偏移所致 Are the results likely to be affected by confounding? 是否由混杂偏移所致 Are the results likely to be affected by chance variation? 是否出于偶然因素 C. Internal validity— consideration of positive features of causation内部真实性——因果关系阳性特征的考虑 1. Is there a correct time relationship? 是否存在前因后果的时间关系 2. Is the relationship strong? 联系强度 3. Is there a dose-response relationship? 是否存在剂量反应关系? Are the results consistent within the study? 不同的相关研究指标结果是否一致 5. Is there any specificity within the study? 研究是否存在特异性? D. External validity—generalization of the results 外部特异性—结果能否外推 Can the study results be applied to the eligible population? 结果能否适用于合格研究人群 Can the study results be applied to the source population? 结果能否适用于源人群 Can the study results be applied to other relevant populations? 结果是否适用于其他相关人群 E. Comparison of the results with other evidence 与其它证据的比较 1. Are the results consist with other evidence, particularly evidence from studies of similar or more powerful study design? 研究结果是否与其它研究(尤其是设计更好,证据更强的)结果相似或一致? 2. Does the total evidence suggest any specificity? 研究结果是否存在特异性? 3. Are the results plausible, in terms of a biological mechanism? 研究结果是否合理,能否用生物学机制解释 4. If a major effect is shown, is it coherent with the distribution of the exposure and the outcome? 如果存在联系,该联系与人群的暴露与结局分布是否一致? The Revised CONSORT Statement for Reporting Randomized Trials: Explanation and Elaboration INCOMPLETE AND INACCURATE EPORTING information on whether assessment of outcomes* was blinded was reported in only 30% of 67 trial reports in four leading journals in 1979 and 19

文档评论(0)

ctuorn0371 + 关注
实名认证
文档贡献者

该用户很懒,什么也没介绍

1亿VIP精品文档

相关文档