Visualization studies on evidence‐based medicine domain knowledge (series 3): visualization for dissemination of evidence based medicine information

Shen, Jiantong; Luo, Yao; Li, Y; Clarke, Mike; Gan, Qihong; Fan, Yi; Gou, Yunjiu; Wang, Li

doi:10.1111/j.1756-5391.2011.01128.x

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A few studies have examined the reporting quality of SRs/MAs in various fields, and found that the reporting quality of SRs/MAs was poor with many flaws [ 5 - 8 ]. Recently, the concept of evidence-based medicine has widely spread across China through the Chinese Journal of Evidence-based Medicine ( CJEBM ), the Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine ( JEBM ), the Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Pediatrics ( CJEBP ), and the Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Cardiovascular Medicine ( EBCVM ) [ 9 ]. In this study, we sought to determine the degree to which studies published in these four journals met the PRISMA criteria for reporting, whether it had improved after publication of the PRISMA statement, and factors associated with good reporting.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Quality of reporting of systematic reviews published in “evidence-based” Chinese journals

et al. 2014

Syst Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThe number of systematic reviews (SRs)/meta-analyses (MAs) has increased dramatically in China over the past decades. However, evaluation of quality of reporting of systematic reviews published has not been undertaken. The objective of this study is to evaluate the quality of reporting of SRs/MAs assessing efficacy and/or harms of clinical interventions published in “evidence-based” Chinese journals.MethodsWeb-based database searches were conducted for the Chinese Journal of Evidence-based Medicine, the Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine, the Chinese Journal of Evidence Based Pediatrics, and the Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Cardiovascular Medicine. SRs/MAs assessing efficacy and/or harms of clinical interventions were included. The cut-off was December 31st 2011. The PRISMA statement was applied to assess the quality of reporting. Each item was assessed as follows: ‘Yes’ for total compliance, scored ‘1’; ‘partial’ for partial compliance, scored ‘0.5’; and ‘No’ for non-compliance, scored ‘0’. The review was considered to have major flaws if it received a total score of ≤15.0, minor flaws if it received a total score of 15.5 to 21.0, and minimal flaws if it received a total score 21.5 to 27.0. Odds ratios were used for binary variables, and the mean difference was used for continuous variables. Analyses were performed using RevMan 5.0 software.ResultsOverall, 487 SRs/MAs were identified and assessed. The included reviews had medium quality with minor flaws based on PRISMA total scores (range: 8.5–26.0; mean: 19.6 ± 3.3). The stratified analysis showed that SRs/MAs with more than 3 authors, from a university, hospital + university cooperation, multiple affiliations (≥2), and funding have significantly higher quality of reporting of SRs/MAs; 58% of the included reviews were considered to have minor flaws (total score of 15.6 to 21.0). Only 9.6% of reviews were considered to have major flaws. Specific areas needing improvement in reporting include the abstract, protocol and registration, and characteristics of the search.ConclusionsThe reporting of SRs published in “evidence-based” Chinese journals is poor and needs to be improved in order for reviews to be useful. SR authors should use the PRISMA checklist to ensure complete and accurate accounts of their SRs.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Quality of reporting of systematic reviews published in “evidence-based” Chinese journals

et al. 2014

Syst Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Evidence-based practice contributes to improving healthcare quality and equity, and informs healthcare decision-making, particularly with regard to recommending appropriate evidence-based interventions [ 1 , 2 ]. With support from governments, professional associations and international organisations, evidence-based healthcare in China has developed rapidly over the past two decades, as highlighted by the development of medical and nursing curriculums, and sharp increases in the number of empirical studies and publications of well-conducted systematic reviews in the country [ [2] , [3] , [4] , [5] , [6] ]. Moreover, many frontline clinicians have exhibited a positive attitude towards evidence-based healthcare and agree that its implementation is necessary in clinical environments [ [7] , [8] , [9] ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Other determinants include the knowledge and attitudes related to evidence-based practice, whether clinicians possess the skill sets needed for applying evidence-based principles to knowledge translation, and their educational background [ 7 , 8 , 11 , 12 ]. In addition, an imbalance in the support for the development and organisation of evidence-based healthcare among different disciplines, healthcare and academic institutions, and regions has led to great diversity in demand for learning resources and knowledge translation strategies [ 3 , 5 , 8 ]. Thus, to promote evidence-informed healthcare and knowledge translation, it is imperative to provide the most-needed evidence and training based on a comprehensive understanding of the needs and expectations of healthcare personnel, especially for advocates for evidence-informed health care, which are often well-equipped with evidence resources [ 15 , 16 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Needs assessment and expectations regarding evidence-based practice knowledge acquisition and training activities: A cross-sectional study of healthcare personnel in China

Chau

Chien

Liu

et al. 2022

International Journal of Nursing Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives Evidence-based healthcare contributes to the improvement of healthcare quality and informs healthcare decision-making. The provision of timely high-quality evidence is always required to fulfil the ever-changing needs and expectations of healthcare personnel. This study aimed to assess the needs and expectations of healthcare personnel regarding evidence-based healthcare in China. Methods We conducted a cross-sectional online survey from December 8, 2020 to January 15, 2021 involving 901 participants across China. Healthcare providers, policy makers, researchers and educators, and full-time postgraduate medical and nursing students working/living in China were eligible to participate. A self-developed questionnaire was used. Results Participants generally agreed that health-related research evidence was beneficial. Evidence-based resources, such as Cochrane resources, were only known or used by about half of the respondents due to difficulties related to availability and accessibility. Various types of resources, topics of evidence, and themes of workshops were of particular interest to most of the participants. Conclusions The dissemination and translation of evidence, provision of more support in evidence availability, offering evidence-based training, and determining the most in-demand research areas have been identified as priority areas of work which could fulfil the needs and expectations of healthcare personnel in China.

show abstract

Mapping of diseases from clinical medicine research—a visualization study

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

By employing bibliometric method, this study aimed to visualize the research hotspots and correlations among clinical medicine subjects. Literatures were retrieved from the PubMed database based on MeSH words and free-text phrases and screened based on inclusion and exclusion criteria. The disease themes were manually marked according to ICD-10. Co-word analysis and strategic diagram methods were applied to explore the hot topics and development trends of disease themes. 2551 articles were included after literature screening. The amount of paper showed an increasing trend and reached a peak in 2013. The subjects of adults and the elderly accounted for 45.0% and 27.0% respectively. The United States of America had the most publication, with Massachusetts and California being the most prevalent states, and Harvard University was the most prolific institution. Co-word analysis revealed that research hot topics of diseases were divided into 8 themes, among which the most was “disease of the circulatory system” and “injury, poisoning and certain other consequences of external causes”. The strategic diagram showed that the above two topics were mature but relatively independent, while the “physical fitness” topic was not mature enough but was closely related to the others. There are more and more data-driven studies in the field of medicine and health, while, huge development spaces in the full spectrum of the diseases do exist. Mining the published researches through bibliometrics and visualized methods could come up with valuable results to inform further study.

show abstract

Visualization studies on evidence‐based medicine domain knowledge (series 3): visualization for dissemination of evidence based medicine information

Cited by 3 publications

References 14 publications

Quality of reporting of systematic reviews published in “evidence-based” Chinese journals

Quality of reporting of systematic reviews published in “evidence-based” Chinese journals

Needs assessment and expectations regarding evidence-based practice knowledge acquisition and training activities: A cross-sectional study of healthcare personnel in China

Mapping of diseases from clinical medicine research—a visualization study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About