缩小差距:通过整合定性研究提高骨科成果。

IF 2.8 Q1 ORTHOPEDICS Bone & Joint Open Pub Date : 2024-11-01 DOI:10.1302/2633-1462.511.BJO-2024-0145.R1
Louise E Mew, Vanessa Heaslip, Tikki Immins, Arul Ramasamy, Thomas W Wainwright
{"title":"缩小差距:通过整合定性研究提高骨科成果。","authors":"Louise E Mew, Vanessa Heaslip, Tikki Immins, Arul Ramasamy, Thomas W Wainwright","doi":"10.1302/2633-1462.511.BJO-2024-0145.R1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>The evidence base within trauma and orthopaedics has traditionally favoured quantitative research methodologies. Qualitative research can provide unique insights which illuminate patient experiences and perceptions of care. Qualitative methods reveal the subjective narratives of patients that are not captured by quantitative data, providing a more comprehensive understanding of patient-centred care. The aim of this study is to quantify the level of qualitative research within the orthopaedic literature.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A bibliometric search of journals' online archives and multiple databases was undertaken in March 2024, to identify articles using qualitative research methods in the top 12 trauma and orthopaedic journals based on the 2023 impact factor and SCImago rating. The bibliometric search was conducted and reported in accordance with the preliminary guideline for reporting bibliometric reviews of the biomedical literature (BIBLIO).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 7,201 papers reviewed, 136 included qualitative methods (0.1%). There was no significant difference between the journals, apart from <i>Bone & Joint Open</i>, which included 21 studies using qualitative methods, equalling 4% of its published articles.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study demonstrates that there is a very low number of qualitative research papers published within trauma and orthopaedic journals. Given the increasing focus on patient outcomes and improving the patient experience, it may be argued that there is a requirement to support both quantitative and qualitative approaches to orthopaedic research. Combining qualitative and quantitative methods may effectively address the complex and personal aspects of patients' care, ensuring that outcomes align with patient values and enhance overall care quality.</p>","PeriodicalId":34103,"journal":{"name":"Bone & Joint Open","volume":"5 11","pages":"953-961"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11528305/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Bridging the gap: enhancing orthopaedic outcomes through qualitative research integration.\",\"authors\":\"Louise E Mew, Vanessa Heaslip, Tikki Immins, Arul Ramasamy, Thomas W Wainwright\",\"doi\":\"10.1302/2633-1462.511.BJO-2024-0145.R1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>The evidence base within trauma and orthopaedics has traditionally favoured quantitative research methodologies. Qualitative research can provide unique insights which illuminate patient experiences and perceptions of care. Qualitative methods reveal the subjective narratives of patients that are not captured by quantitative data, providing a more comprehensive understanding of patient-centred care. The aim of this study is to quantify the level of qualitative research within the orthopaedic literature.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A bibliometric search of journals' online archives and multiple databases was undertaken in March 2024, to identify articles using qualitative research methods in the top 12 trauma and orthopaedic journals based on the 2023 impact factor and SCImago rating. The bibliometric search was conducted and reported in accordance with the preliminary guideline for reporting bibliometric reviews of the biomedical literature (BIBLIO).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 7,201 papers reviewed, 136 included qualitative methods (0.1%). There was no significant difference between the journals, apart from <i>Bone & Joint Open</i>, which included 21 studies using qualitative methods, equalling 4% of its published articles.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study demonstrates that there is a very low number of qualitative research papers published within trauma and orthopaedic journals. Given the increasing focus on patient outcomes and improving the patient experience, it may be argued that there is a requirement to support both quantitative and qualitative approaches to orthopaedic research. Combining qualitative and quantitative methods may effectively address the complex and personal aspects of patients' care, ensuring that outcomes align with patient values and enhance overall care quality.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":34103,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Bone & Joint Open\",\"volume\":\"5 11\",\"pages\":\"953-961\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11528305/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Bone & Joint Open\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1302/2633-1462.511.BJO-2024-0145.R1\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bone & Joint Open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1302/2633-1462.511.BJO-2024-0145.R1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:创伤和矫形外科的证据基础历来偏重于定量研究方法。定性研究可以提供独特的见解,阐明病人的经历和对护理的看法。定性方法揭示了定量数据无法捕捉的患者主观叙述,从而更全面地了解以患者为中心的护理。本研究旨在量化骨科文献中定性研究的水平:方法:2024 年 3 月,我们对期刊的在线档案和多个数据库进行了文献计量学检索,根据 2023 年的影响因子和 SCImago 评级,在排名前 12 位的创伤和骨科期刊中找出使用定性研究方法的文章。文献计量学检索是根据生物医学文献文献计量学综述报告初步指南(BIBLIO)进行和报告的:在审查的 7201 篇论文中,有 136 篇采用了定性方法(0.1%)。除了《骨与关节》(Bone & Joint Open)收录了21项使用定性方法的研究,相当于其已发表文章的4%之外,其他期刊之间没有明显差异:这项研究表明,在创伤和骨科期刊上发表的定性研究论文数量很少。鉴于人们越来越关注患者的治疗效果和改善患者的就医体验,可以说骨科研究需要同时支持定量和定性方法。将定性和定量方法结合起来可有效解决患者护理中复杂的个人问题,确保结果符合患者的价值观并提高整体护理质量。
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
Bridging the gap: enhancing orthopaedic outcomes through qualitative research integration.

Aims: The evidence base within trauma and orthopaedics has traditionally favoured quantitative research methodologies. Qualitative research can provide unique insights which illuminate patient experiences and perceptions of care. Qualitative methods reveal the subjective narratives of patients that are not captured by quantitative data, providing a more comprehensive understanding of patient-centred care. The aim of this study is to quantify the level of qualitative research within the orthopaedic literature.

Methods: A bibliometric search of journals' online archives and multiple databases was undertaken in March 2024, to identify articles using qualitative research methods in the top 12 trauma and orthopaedic journals based on the 2023 impact factor and SCImago rating. The bibliometric search was conducted and reported in accordance with the preliminary guideline for reporting bibliometric reviews of the biomedical literature (BIBLIO).

Results: Of the 7,201 papers reviewed, 136 included qualitative methods (0.1%). There was no significant difference between the journals, apart from Bone & Joint Open, which included 21 studies using qualitative methods, equalling 4% of its published articles.

Conclusion: This study demonstrates that there is a very low number of qualitative research papers published within trauma and orthopaedic journals. Given the increasing focus on patient outcomes and improving the patient experience, it may be argued that there is a requirement to support both quantitative and qualitative approaches to orthopaedic research. Combining qualitative and quantitative methods may effectively address the complex and personal aspects of patients' care, ensuring that outcomes align with patient values and enhance overall care quality.

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
Bone & Joint Open
Bone & Joint Open ORTHOPEDICS-
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊最新文献
Arthroscopic Bankart repair versus arthroscopic Latarjet for anterior shoulder instability in adolescents. Revisiting the radiological signs for the first metatarsal pronation assessment. Clinical outcomes after extra-articular resection of hip joint tumour using a custom-made osteotomy guide and 3D-printed endoprosthesis with posterior column preserved. Uncompromised total knee arthroplasty function after distal femoral osteotomy: a self-matched study of bilateral total knee arthroplasties following unilateral osteotomy with a mean 32-year follow-up Outcomes of external versus internal fixation for traumatic lower limb fractures in low- and middle-income countries.
×
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