调查针对鞭打相关疾病患者的运动的随机对照试验的报告质量;系统综述

IF 2.2 3区 医学 Q1 REHABILITATION Musculoskeletal Science and Practice Pub Date : 2024-07-14 DOI:10.1016/j.msksp.2024.103145
Andrea Colombi , Silvia Vedani , Antonello Viceconti , Claire Stapleton
{"title":"调查针对鞭打相关疾病患者的运动的随机对照试验的报告质量;系统综述","authors":"Andrea Colombi ,&nbsp;Silvia Vedani ,&nbsp;Antonello Viceconti ,&nbsp;Claire Stapleton","doi":"10.1016/j.msksp.2024.103145","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Whiplash-associated disorders are a common sequela of road traffic accidents. Exercise therapy is considered an effective intervention, and it is recommended for the management of such condition. However, the application of research findings to everyday clinical practice is dependent on sufficient details being reported.</p></div><div><h3>Objectives</h3><p>To explore the quality of reporting in studies investigating the effectiveness of exercise for whiplash-associated disorders.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>A literature search was conducted to identify studies testing the effectiveness of exercise for whiplash-associated disorders. Two reporting checklists were used to evaluate reporting completeness. The median positive scores for each study and overall percentage of positive scores for each item were calculated. Percentage agreement and the Cohen's Kappa coefficient were calculated.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Twenty-one studies were included. According to the Template for Intervention Description and Replication checklist, items were reported appropriately with a median of 29% (range 0–95%, IQR 40.5). The median number of adequately reported items per study was 5 (range 1–10, IQR 3). For the Consensus on Exercise Reporting Template checklist, items were reported appropriately with a median of 29% (range 0–57%, IQR 29). The median number of adequately reported items per study was 4 (range 0–16, IQR 8). Percentage agreement ranged from 57% to 100% while Cohen's Kappa from −0.17 to 1.00.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>The study reveals significant gaps in the quality of reporting in studies investigating exercise for whiplash-associated disorders as both checklists showed a median reporting adequacy of only 29%. Overall, the inter-rater agreement for both checklists was acceptable.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":56036,"journal":{"name":"Musculoskeletal Science and Practice","volume":"73 ","pages":"Article 103145"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The quality of reporting in randomized controlled trials investigating exercise for individuals with whiplash-associated disorders; a systematic review\",\"authors\":\"Andrea Colombi ,&nbsp;Silvia Vedani ,&nbsp;Antonello Viceconti ,&nbsp;Claire Stapleton\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.msksp.2024.103145\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Whiplash-associated disorders are a common sequela of road traffic accidents. Exercise therapy is considered an effective intervention, and it is recommended for the management of such condition. However, the application of research findings to everyday clinical practice is dependent on sufficient details being reported.</p></div><div><h3>Objectives</h3><p>To explore the quality of reporting in studies investigating the effectiveness of exercise for whiplash-associated disorders.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>A literature search was conducted to identify studies testing the effectiveness of exercise for whiplash-associated disorders. Two reporting checklists were used to evaluate reporting completeness. The median positive scores for each study and overall percentage of positive scores for each item were calculated. Percentage agreement and the Cohen's Kappa coefficient were calculated.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Twenty-one studies were included. According to the Template for Intervention Description and Replication checklist, items were reported appropriately with a median of 29% (range 0–95%, IQR 40.5). The median number of adequately reported items per study was 5 (range 1–10, IQR 3). For the Consensus on Exercise Reporting Template checklist, items were reported appropriately with a median of 29% (range 0–57%, IQR 29). The median number of adequately reported items per study was 4 (range 0–16, IQR 8). Percentage agreement ranged from 57% to 100% while Cohen's Kappa from −0.17 to 1.00.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>The study reveals significant gaps in the quality of reporting in studies investigating exercise for whiplash-associated disorders as both checklists showed a median reporting adequacy of only 29%. Overall, the inter-rater agreement for both checklists was acceptable.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":56036,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Musculoskeletal Science and Practice\",\"volume\":\"73 \",\"pages\":\"Article 103145\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Musculoskeletal Science and Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2468781224002406\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"REHABILITATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Musculoskeletal Science and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2468781224002406","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景鞭相关疾病是道路交通事故的常见后遗症。运动疗法被认为是一种有效的干预措施,建议用于此类疾病的治疗。目的 探讨运动治疗鞭打相关疾病有效性研究的报告质量。方法 通过文献检索来确定测试运动治疗鞭打相关疾病有效性的研究。使用两个报告核对表来评估报告的完整性。计算了每项研究的阳性得分中位数和每项阳性得分的总百分比。结果共纳入 21 项研究。根据 "干预描述和复制模板 "核对表,适当报告项目的中位数为 29%(范围为 0-95%,IQR 为 40.5)。每项研究充分报告项目的中位数为 5 个(范围为 1-10,IQR 为 3)。对于运动报告模板共识核对表,项目报告适当的中位数为 29%(范围为 0-57%,IQR 为 29)。每项研究充分报告项目的中位数为 4 个(范围 0-16,IQR 8)。结论该研究显示,在调查运动治疗鞭打相关疾病的研究中,报告质量存在很大差距,因为两份检查表的报告充分性中位数仅为 29%。总体而言,两份核对表的评分者之间的一致性是可以接受的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
The quality of reporting in randomized controlled trials investigating exercise for individuals with whiplash-associated disorders; a systematic review

Background

Whiplash-associated disorders are a common sequela of road traffic accidents. Exercise therapy is considered an effective intervention, and it is recommended for the management of such condition. However, the application of research findings to everyday clinical practice is dependent on sufficient details being reported.

Objectives

To explore the quality of reporting in studies investigating the effectiveness of exercise for whiplash-associated disorders.

Methods

A literature search was conducted to identify studies testing the effectiveness of exercise for whiplash-associated disorders. Two reporting checklists were used to evaluate reporting completeness. The median positive scores for each study and overall percentage of positive scores for each item were calculated. Percentage agreement and the Cohen's Kappa coefficient were calculated.

Results

Twenty-one studies were included. According to the Template for Intervention Description and Replication checklist, items were reported appropriately with a median of 29% (range 0–95%, IQR 40.5). The median number of adequately reported items per study was 5 (range 1–10, IQR 3). For the Consensus on Exercise Reporting Template checklist, items were reported appropriately with a median of 29% (range 0–57%, IQR 29). The median number of adequately reported items per study was 4 (range 0–16, IQR 8). Percentage agreement ranged from 57% to 100% while Cohen's Kappa from −0.17 to 1.00.

Conclusions

The study reveals significant gaps in the quality of reporting in studies investigating exercise for whiplash-associated disorders as both checklists showed a median reporting adequacy of only 29%. Overall, the inter-rater agreement for both checklists was acceptable.

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
Musculoskeletal Science and Practice
Musculoskeletal Science and Practice Health Professions-Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
8.70%
发文量
152
审稿时长
48 days
期刊介绍: Musculoskeletal Science & Practice, international journal of musculoskeletal physiotherapy, is a peer-reviewed international journal (previously Manual Therapy), publishing high quality original research, review and Masterclass articles that contribute to improving the clinical understanding of appropriate care processes for musculoskeletal disorders. The journal publishes articles that influence or add to the body of evidence on diagnostic and therapeutic processes, patient centered care, guidelines for musculoskeletal therapeutics and theoretical models that support developments in assessment, diagnosis, clinical reasoning and interventions.
期刊最新文献
The effectiveness of education for people with shoulder pain: A systematic review. Defining core competencies for telehealth in healthcare higher education: A Delphi study. Effects of a smartphone game to facilitate active neck movements on the incidence of neck pain among office workers: A 6-month cluster-randomized controlled trial. Validity and reliability of the Danish version of the Short Form Brief Pain Inventory. The prognostic reasoning by physiotherapists of musculoskeletal disorders: A phenomenological exploratory study.
×
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