ObjectivesTo provide an overview of whether the clinical decision support system (CDSS) was effective in reducing medication error and improving medication safety and to assess the quality of available scientific evidence.MethodsPubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library, CBM, WanFang Data, VIP and CNKI databases were electronically searched to collect systematic reviews (SRs) on application of clinical decision support system in the medication error and safety from January, 1996 to November, 2018. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and then evaluated methodological quality of included SRs by using AMSTAR tool.g AMSTAR tool.ResultsA total of 20 SRs including 256 980 healthcare practitioners and 1 683 675 patients were included. Specifically, 16 studies demonstrated moderate quality and 4 demonstrated high quality. 19 SRs evaluated multiple process of care outcome: 9 were sufficient evidence, 6 were limited evidence, and 7 were insufficient evidence which proved that CDSS had a positive effect on process outcome. 13 SRs evaluated reported patient outcomes: 1 with sufficient evidence, 3 with limited evidence, and 9 without sufficient evidence.ConclusionsCDSS reduces medication error by inconsistently improving process of care measures and seldom improving patient outcomes. Larger samples and longer-term studies are required to ensure a larger and more reliable evidence base on the effects of CDSS intervention on patient outcomes.
Objective To compare the efficiency of epidermis cell culture between big graft method and small strip method. Methods The big graft method was to cut the skin tissue reticularly from dermis layer while the epidermis were not cut off. After it was digested fully in trypsin, theepidermis was separated from skin and was used to culture epidermal cells. The small strip method was routine. The time to cut the skin and to separate the epidermis was recorded, and the number and quality of cells were compared between two methods. Results It took 8-10 minutes to cut an area of 5 cm2 skin into small strips and 1-2 minutes into big grafts. It took 10-15 minutes to separate the epidermis from the same area skin by small strip method and 2 minutes by big graft method. The cells showed better vigor and its number was more by big grafts than by small strips.The chance of fibroblast contamination was reduced obviously. Conclusion The big graft method is simpler than the small strip method and can culture more epidermis cells with less chance of fibroblast contamination.
Meta-research is the "research of research", which aims to explore the existing quality of research in the scientific field, so as to help researchers comprehensively and systematically understand the current status of research development in a certain field, and to find relevant solutions to improve the quality of research in the field, which is a kind of scientific research concept. The concept of meta-research is widely used in the field of medicine, but its definition and use are still unclear in China. Therefore, this paper explores the origin of the definition of meta-research, the scope of research areas involved, and the path of its translation and implementation from the medical perspective, to help domestic researchers understand and familiarize themselves with the theoretical basis of meta-research, and provide them with a framework of ideas for the correct conduct and implementation of meta-research, so as to promote the scientific application and development of meta-research in the domestic medical field.
Systematic review is an important method to obtain clinical decision evidence. The traditional systematic review is primarily conducted manually, which cannot meet the needs of rapid decision-making due to its high time and labor force cost as well as low efficiency. However, the development of information technology has laid the foundation for computer-aided systematic review methods. Attempts have been made to replace or enhance manual operations by introducing computer technology in all aspects of systematic review, thereby improving efficiency. This paper integrates the methodological research and its application of computer-aided systematic review both domestically and abroad from perspectives of literature acquisition, data processing and evidence evaluation. The aim of this paper is to understand the status quo and future trend in this field, and to provide reference for further researches related to automated systematic review technology.
ObjectiveTo construct rapid health technology assessment (RHTA) reporting norms, with a view to providing methodological references for RHTA research and reporting. MethodsBased on the preliminary pool of entries constructed by the literature research results, and taking into account the characteristics of RHTA, a Delphi expert correspondence questionnaire was designed, and 25 experts in the field of HTA were selected to conduct multiple rounds of expert correspondence. By calculating the expert authority coefficient and opinion coordination coefficient, combined with the average value of the entry score, coefficient of variation and full score ratio, the entries were selected to form the list of RHTA report specifications. ResultsThe positive coefficient of experts in both rounds of investigation was 100%, the expert authority coefficient in the first round was 0.858, and the expert authority coefficient in the second round was 0.838. The Kendall coordination coefficient in the first round was 0.169, and in the second round it was 0.081. According to the correspondence of 2 rounds of investigation, the final formation included 8 aspects, 26 first-level entries and 18 second-level entries in the list of RHTA report specifications. ConclusionThis study constructed the RHTA report specification, which is both scientific and operable, providing a reference for RHTA report writing.
Shared decision making (SDM), as a healthcare service model, requires clinical practice to follow the “patient-centred” medical principle and emphasizes patient participation in the medical decision-making process, which promotes medical equality and improves the quality and effectiveness of healthcare services. However, its methodology has not yet been introduced into the field of Chinese medicine (CM), and there is still a lack of clear guidance on how to implement SDM in clinical practice. This study provided the method of establishing the conceptual framework of SDM in CM, introducing multiple methods according to evidence-based medicine, and conducing an implementation study to explore the applicability of SDM model in CM clinical practice, with the aim of providing references for the application of the SDM in the clinical practice of CM in the future.
Accurately assessing the risk of bias is a critical challenge in network meta-analysis (NMA). By integrating direct and indirect evidence, NMA enables the comparison of multiple interventions, but its outcomes are often influenced by bias risks, particularly the propagation of bias within complex evidence networks. This paper systematically reviews commonly used bias risk assessment tools in NMA, highlighting their applications, limitations, and challenges across interventional trials, observational studies, diagnostic tests, and animal experiments. Addressing the issues of tool misapplication, mixed usage, and the lack of comprehensive tools for overall bias assessment in NMA, we propose strategies such as simplifying tool operation, enhancing usability, and standardizing evaluation processes. Furthermore, advancements in artificial intelligence (AI) and large language models (LLMs) offer promising opportunities to streamline bias risk assessments and reduce human interference. The development of specialized tools and the integration of intelligent technologies will enhance the rigor and reliability of NMA studies, providing robust evidence to support medical research and clinical decision-making.
Since the concept of core outcome set (COS) was introduced into clinical trials of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM), researchers have paid much more attention to develop COS for specific diseases. Although researchers believe that the characteristics of TCM, such as syndromes, should be considered in the COS of TCM, it was insufficiently addressed. In addition, the naming of TCM syndromes has not been standardized, and the classification and diagnostic criteria for specific diseases have been inconsistent. Thus, it is difficult to include TCM syndromes in the COS. Different diseases may show similar TCM syndromes which makes research difficult. Based on previous studies, this paper provided methods of developing core TCM syndromes set according to the model of combination of disease and syndrome and the model of syndrome dominating disease to provide references for future researches.
The necessity and methods of systematic review or Meta-analysis of observational studies were introduced. The difference between the systematic review or Meta-analysis of observational studies and randomized controlled trials was also described.