3科克伦图书馆

Cindy Farquhar, Patrick Vandekerckhove
{"title":"3科克伦图书馆","authors":"Cindy Farquhar,&nbsp;Patrick Vandekerckhove","doi":"10.1016/S0950-3552(96)80005-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>In the current era of patients seeking better information, managers seeking cost-effective treatments, clinicians struggling to keep up with the expanding medical literature, and professional groups requiring continuing medical education, there is a clear need for up-to-date and relevant systematic reviews of the effectiveness of treatment within our specialty. Such reviews will play an increasing role in the education of health professionals and lay people, in the evolution of the health service and in the direction of future research. The Cochrane Collaboration provides the infrastructure for the development and dissemination of these reviews. The specialty of obstetrics and gynaecology will benefit from several related groups already working within the Cochrane Collaboration (Pregnancy and Childbirth, Subfertility, Menstrual Disorders and Incontinence). Other groups are in the process of, or likely to, register in the near future (Fertility Control, Gynaecological Cancer). However, the need and demand for a large number of systematic reviews exceeds the current capacity of those who have committed themselves to prepare and maintain such reviews, and substantial challenges remain. However, there is every reason to believe that a concerted effort over many years will be worth while. Earlier in this commentary, obstetrics and gynaecology was referred to as the specialty most deserving of the ‘wooden spoon’ for its lack of evidence-based practice. With the development of various gynaecological groups within the Collaboration, we hope that the ‘wooden spoon’ can be discarded from our ranks for good.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":77031,"journal":{"name":"Bailliere's clinical obstetrics and gynaecology","volume":"10 4","pages":"Pages 569-583"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1996-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/S0950-3552(96)80005-8","citationCount":"2555","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"3 The Cochrane Library\",\"authors\":\"Cindy Farquhar,&nbsp;Patrick Vandekerckhove\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/S0950-3552(96)80005-8\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>In the current era of patients seeking better information, managers seeking cost-effective treatments, clinicians struggling to keep up with the expanding medical literature, and professional groups requiring continuing medical education, there is a clear need for up-to-date and relevant systematic reviews of the effectiveness of treatment within our specialty. Such reviews will play an increasing role in the education of health professionals and lay people, in the evolution of the health service and in the direction of future research. The Cochrane Collaboration provides the infrastructure for the development and dissemination of these reviews. The specialty of obstetrics and gynaecology will benefit from several related groups already working within the Cochrane Collaboration (Pregnancy and Childbirth, Subfertility, Menstrual Disorders and Incontinence). Other groups are in the process of, or likely to, register in the near future (Fertility Control, Gynaecological Cancer). However, the need and demand for a large number of systematic reviews exceeds the current capacity of those who have committed themselves to prepare and maintain such reviews, and substantial challenges remain. However, there is every reason to believe that a concerted effort over many years will be worth while. Earlier in this commentary, obstetrics and gynaecology was referred to as the specialty most deserving of the ‘wooden spoon’ for its lack of evidence-based practice. With the development of various gynaecological groups within the Collaboration, we hope that the ‘wooden spoon’ can be discarded from our ranks for good.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":77031,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Bailliere's clinical obstetrics and gynaecology\",\"volume\":\"10 4\",\"pages\":\"Pages 569-583\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1996-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/S0950-3552(96)80005-8\",\"citationCount\":\"2555\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Bailliere's clinical obstetrics and gynaecology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0950355296800058\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bailliere's clinical obstetrics and gynaecology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0950355296800058","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2555

摘要

在当今这个时代,患者寻求更好的信息,管理者寻求具有成本效益的治疗方法,临床医生努力跟上不断扩大的医学文献,专业团体需要继续接受医学教育,显然需要对我们专业治疗的有效性进行最新和相关的系统评价。这种审查将在卫生专业人员和非专业人员的教育、卫生服务的发展和未来研究方向方面发挥越来越大的作用。Cochrane协作网为这些综述的发展和传播提供了基础设施。产科和妇科专业将受益于Cochrane协作中的几个相关小组(妊娠和分娩、生育能力低下、月经紊乱和尿失禁)。其他团体正在或可能在不久的将来进行登记(生育控制、妇科癌症)。然而,对大量系统审查的需要和需求超过了那些致力于准备和维护这种审查的人目前的能力,并且实质性的挑战仍然存在。然而,我们有充分的理由相信,多年的共同努力是值得的。在这篇评论的早些时候,产科和妇科被认为是最值得“木勺”的专业,因为它缺乏循证实践。随着各妇科小组的发展,我们希望“木勺”可以永远从我们的队伍中消失。
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
3 The Cochrane Library

In the current era of patients seeking better information, managers seeking cost-effective treatments, clinicians struggling to keep up with the expanding medical literature, and professional groups requiring continuing medical education, there is a clear need for up-to-date and relevant systematic reviews of the effectiveness of treatment within our specialty. Such reviews will play an increasing role in the education of health professionals and lay people, in the evolution of the health service and in the direction of future research. The Cochrane Collaboration provides the infrastructure for the development and dissemination of these reviews. The specialty of obstetrics and gynaecology will benefit from several related groups already working within the Cochrane Collaboration (Pregnancy and Childbirth, Subfertility, Menstrual Disorders and Incontinence). Other groups are in the process of, or likely to, register in the near future (Fertility Control, Gynaecological Cancer). However, the need and demand for a large number of systematic reviews exceeds the current capacity of those who have committed themselves to prepare and maintain such reviews, and substantial challenges remain. However, there is every reason to believe that a concerted effort over many years will be worth while. Earlier in this commentary, obstetrics and gynaecology was referred to as the specialty most deserving of the ‘wooden spoon’ for its lack of evidence-based practice. With the development of various gynaecological groups within the Collaboration, we hope that the ‘wooden spoon’ can be discarded from our ranks for good.

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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Prolapse. Vaginal hysterectomy. Contributors to this issue Preface 3 Adverse effects of luteinizing hormone on fertility: fact or fantasy
×
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