评估肝胆外科随机对照试验的质量和数量:范围/绘图回顾

IF 4.4 3区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL European Journal of Clinical Investigation Pub Date : 2024-04-16 DOI:10.1111/eci.14210
Ali Majlesara, Ehsan Aminizadeh, Ali Ramouz, Elias Khajeh, Mohammadamin Shahrbaf, Filipe Borges, Gil Goncalves, Carlos Carvalho, Mohammad Golriz, Arianeb Mehrabi
{"title":"评估肝胆外科随机对照试验的质量和数量:范围/绘图回顾","authors":"Ali Majlesara,&nbsp;Ehsan Aminizadeh,&nbsp;Ali Ramouz,&nbsp;Elias Khajeh,&nbsp;Mohammadamin Shahrbaf,&nbsp;Filipe Borges,&nbsp;Gil Goncalves,&nbsp;Carlos Carvalho,&nbsp;Mohammad Golriz,&nbsp;Arianeb Mehrabi","doi":"10.1111/eci.14210","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Aim</h3>\n \n <p>To evaluate the quantity and quality of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in hepatobiliary surgery and for identifying gaps in current evidences.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>A systematic search was conducted in MEDLINE (via PubMed), Web of Science, and Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials (CENTRAL) for RCTs of hepatobiliary surgery published from inception until the end of 2023. The quality of each study was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias (RoB) tool. The associations between risk of bias and the region and publication date were also assessed. Evidence mapping was performed to identify research gaps in the field.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>The study included 1187 records. The number and proportion of published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in hepatobiliary surgery increased over time, from 13 RCTs (.0005% of publications) in 1970–1979 to 201 RCTs (.003% of publications) in 2020–2023. There was a significant increase in the number of studies with a low risk of bias in RoB domains (<i>p</i> &lt; .01). The proportion of RCTs with low risk of bias improved significantly after the introduction of CONSORT guidelines (<i>p</i> &lt; .001). The evidence mapping revealed a significant research focus on major and minor hepatectomy and cholecystectomy. However, gaps were identified in liver cyst surgery and hepatobiliary vascular surgery. Additionally, there are gaps in the field of perioperative management and nutrition intervention.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>The quantity and quality of RCTs in hepatobiliary surgery have increased over time, but there is still room for improvement. We have identified gaps in current research that can be addressed in future studies.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":12013,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Clinical Investigation","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluation of quality and quantity of randomized controlled trials in hepatobiliary surgery: A scoping/mapping review\",\"authors\":\"Ali Majlesara,&nbsp;Ehsan Aminizadeh,&nbsp;Ali Ramouz,&nbsp;Elias Khajeh,&nbsp;Mohammadamin Shahrbaf,&nbsp;Filipe Borges,&nbsp;Gil Goncalves,&nbsp;Carlos Carvalho,&nbsp;Mohammad Golriz,&nbsp;Arianeb Mehrabi\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/eci.14210\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Aim</h3>\\n \\n <p>To evaluate the quantity and quality of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in hepatobiliary surgery and for identifying gaps in current evidences.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>A systematic search was conducted in MEDLINE (via PubMed), Web of Science, and Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials (CENTRAL) for RCTs of hepatobiliary surgery published from inception until the end of 2023. The quality of each study was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias (RoB) tool. The associations between risk of bias and the region and publication date were also assessed. Evidence mapping was performed to identify research gaps in the field.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>The study included 1187 records. The number and proportion of published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in hepatobiliary surgery increased over time, from 13 RCTs (.0005% of publications) in 1970–1979 to 201 RCTs (.003% of publications) in 2020–2023. There was a significant increase in the number of studies with a low risk of bias in RoB domains (<i>p</i> &lt; .01). The proportion of RCTs with low risk of bias improved significantly after the introduction of CONSORT guidelines (<i>p</i> &lt; .001). The evidence mapping revealed a significant research focus on major and minor hepatectomy and cholecystectomy. However, gaps were identified in liver cyst surgery and hepatobiliary vascular surgery. Additionally, there are gaps in the field of perioperative management and nutrition intervention.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\\n \\n <p>The quantity and quality of RCTs in hepatobiliary surgery have increased over time, but there is still room for improvement. We have identified gaps in current research that can be addressed in future studies.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12013,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Clinical Investigation\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Clinical Investigation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/eci.14210\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Clinical Investigation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/eci.14210","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

评估肝胆外科随机对照试验(RCT)的数量和质量,找出现有证据的不足之处。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Evaluation of quality and quantity of randomized controlled trials in hepatobiliary surgery: A scoping/mapping review

Aim

To evaluate the quantity and quality of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in hepatobiliary surgery and for identifying gaps in current evidences.

Methods

A systematic search was conducted in MEDLINE (via PubMed), Web of Science, and Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials (CENTRAL) for RCTs of hepatobiliary surgery published from inception until the end of 2023. The quality of each study was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias (RoB) tool. The associations between risk of bias and the region and publication date were also assessed. Evidence mapping was performed to identify research gaps in the field.

Results

The study included 1187 records. The number and proportion of published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in hepatobiliary surgery increased over time, from 13 RCTs (.0005% of publications) in 1970–1979 to 201 RCTs (.003% of publications) in 2020–2023. There was a significant increase in the number of studies with a low risk of bias in RoB domains (p < .01). The proportion of RCTs with low risk of bias improved significantly after the introduction of CONSORT guidelines (p < .001). The evidence mapping revealed a significant research focus on major and minor hepatectomy and cholecystectomy. However, gaps were identified in liver cyst surgery and hepatobiliary vascular surgery. Additionally, there are gaps in the field of perioperative management and nutrition intervention.

Conclusion

The quantity and quality of RCTs in hepatobiliary surgery have increased over time, but there is still room for improvement. We have identified gaps in current research that can be addressed in future studies.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
9.50
自引率
3.60%
发文量
192
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: EJCI considers any original contribution from the most sophisticated basic molecular sciences to applied clinical and translational research and evidence-based medicine across a broad range of subspecialties. The EJCI publishes reports of high-quality research that pertain to the genetic, molecular, cellular, or physiological basis of human biology and disease, as well as research that addresses prevalence, diagnosis, course, treatment, and prevention of disease. We are primarily interested in studies directly pertinent to humans, but submission of robust in vitro and animal work is also encouraged. Interdisciplinary work and research using innovative methods and combinations of laboratory, clinical, and epidemiological methodologies and techniques is of great interest to the journal. Several categories of manuscripts (for detailed description see below) are considered: editorials, original articles (also including randomized clinical trials, systematic reviews and meta-analyses), reviews (narrative reviews), opinion articles (including debates, perspectives and commentaries); and letters to the Editor.
期刊最新文献
Lung damage in SARS-CoV-2 patients: Correspondence. Adiponectin as a biomarker in liver cirrhosis-A systematic review and meta-analysis. Promising biomarker panel to monitor therapeutic efficacy of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in pancreatic cancer patients. Glycolytic activity following anti-CD19 CAR-T cell infusion in non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Diabetes and the risk of cardiovascular events and all-cause mortality among older adults: an individual participant data analysis of five prospective studies.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1