{"title":"外科系统性综述：最佳可用证据还是一次性废物？","authors":"R. Klotz, S. Tenckhoff, Pascal Probst","doi":"10.1515/iss-2022-0029","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Evidence-based medicine demands treatment options for patients to be based on the current best available evidence. Systematic reviews (SRs) with meta-analyses allow surgeons to make therapeutical decisions in accordance with the highest level of evidence. Also, high-quality SRs support physicians to challenge the colossal amount of new research data created daily. The systematic review working group of the Study Center of the German Society of Surgery (SDGC) has created specific methodological literature regarding surgical SRs, giving recommendations to assess critical risk of bias and to prevent the creation of SRs that do not provide any new insights to the field. SRs should only be considered if there is new clinically relevant data available that allows the SR to create novel evidence. To address the dilemma of new SRs generated without adding new evidence, living systematic reviews and evidence mapping represent an innovative approach, in which SRs are regularly updated with new research data.","PeriodicalId":1,"journal":{"name":"Accounts of Chemical Research","volume":"5 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":18.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Surgical systematic reviews: best available evidence or disposable waste?\",\"authors\":\"R. Klotz, S. Tenckhoff, Pascal Probst\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/iss-2022-0029\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n Evidence-based medicine demands treatment options for patients to be based on the current best available evidence. Systematic reviews (SRs) with meta-analyses allow surgeons to make therapeutical decisions in accordance with the highest level of evidence. Also, high-quality SRs support physicians to challenge the colossal amount of new research data created daily. The systematic review working group of the Study Center of the German Society of Surgery (SDGC) has created specific methodological literature regarding surgical SRs, giving recommendations to assess critical risk of bias and to prevent the creation of SRs that do not provide any new insights to the field. SRs should only be considered if there is new clinically relevant data available that allows the SR to create novel evidence. To address the dilemma of new SRs generated without adding new evidence, living systematic reviews and evidence mapping represent an innovative approach, in which SRs are regularly updated with new research data.\",\"PeriodicalId\":1,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Accounts of Chemical Research\",\"volume\":\"5 3\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":18.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Accounts of Chemical Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/iss-2022-0029\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"化学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accounts of Chemical Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/iss-2022-0029","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"化学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Surgical systematic reviews: best available evidence or disposable waste?
Evidence-based medicine demands treatment options for patients to be based on the current best available evidence. Systematic reviews (SRs) with meta-analyses allow surgeons to make therapeutical decisions in accordance with the highest level of evidence. Also, high-quality SRs support physicians to challenge the colossal amount of new research data created daily. The systematic review working group of the Study Center of the German Society of Surgery (SDGC) has created specific methodological literature regarding surgical SRs, giving recommendations to assess critical risk of bias and to prevent the creation of SRs that do not provide any new insights to the field. SRs should only be considered if there is new clinically relevant data available that allows the SR to create novel evidence. To address the dilemma of new SRs generated without adding new evidence, living systematic reviews and evidence mapping represent an innovative approach, in which SRs are regularly updated with new research data.
期刊介绍：
Accounts of Chemical Research presents short, concise and critical articles offering easy-to-read overviews of basic research and applications in all areas of chemistry and biochemistry. These short reviews focus on research from the author’s own laboratory and are designed to teach the reader about a research project. In addition, Accounts of Chemical Research publishes commentaries that give an informed opinion on a current research problem. Special Issues online are devoted to a single topic of unusual activity and significance.
Accounts of Chemical Research replaces the traditional article abstract with an article "Conspectus." These entries synopsize the research affording the reader a closer look at the content and significance of an article. Through this provision of a more detailed description of the article contents, the Conspectus enhances the article's discoverability by search engines and the exposure for the research.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
