Decision-making is often a complex and hard-to-routinize process. Based on the decision-making experience of fighting COVID-19, policymakers have gradually realized that climate action, quality education, and other societal challenges, as well as the sustainable development goals (SDGs) need to be addressed with the best available evidence using an evidence-informed decision-making (EIDM) approach. The Global Commission on Evidence was established in 2021. In addition, the Evidence Commission issued reports in 2022 and 2023. A systematic methodology to address societal challenges with EIDM has been constructed in the report. Five types of domestic evidence (data analytics, evaluation, modeling, qualitative insights, and behavioural/implementation research) and four steps in decision-making process (understanding a problem and its causes, selecting an option for addressing the problem, identifying implementation considerations, and monitoring implementation and evaluating impacts) were used to support four types of decision-makers (government policymakers, organizational leaders, professionals and citizens) in EIDM, as demonstrated by the reports. To further disseminate the concept and methodology of EIDM globally, the secretariat works with 25 Evidence Commissioners to write the report, and continues to cooperate with Country Leads Group from 12 countries to conduct rapid evidence-support system assessments (RESSAs), and collaborates with Evidence Commission Implementation Council to accelerate the implementation of 24 recommendations. The main history, core methodology, and latest developments of the Global Committee on Evidence were systematically reviewed in this paper. We aimed to show decision-makers a new version of how to scientifically address the societal challenges of EIDM.
Objective To investigate the health technology assessment reports, analyze publication characteristics and report quality, and explore hot topics in health technology assessment. Methods Web of Science and CNKI databases were searched to collect complete health technology assessment reports from inception to January 2023. SPSS 26.0 software was used to analyze the publication journals, countries, number of authors, assessment types and assessment contents of the assessment reports. The report quality was assessed based on International Network of Agencies for Health Technology Assessment (INAHTA) report criteria (2007 edition). VOSviewer 1.6.11 was used to analyze keywords clustering. Results A total of 216 papers were included, with 158 published by Chinese authors, and a rapid growth trend in the number of reports over past four years. The rate of reports on health technology social adaptability assessment was only 17.13%. Among the Chinese reports, 25 were general health technology assessments, 35 were rapid assessments, and 3 were mini assessments. Among the English reports, 4 were rapid assessments, and 54 were regular healthcare technology assessments. For the 14 items in the INAHTA reporting criteria, the reporting rates were high for the brief summary (98.61%), problem description (94.91%), and results discussion entries (97.69%). However, the reporting rates were low for criteria such as personnel responsibilities, conflict of interest statements, and peer review statements, at 31.94%, 19.44%, and 3.24% respectively. English literature generally exhibited higher report quality. Conclusion In recent years, the volume of health technology assessment reports in China has been increasing, with developments in assessment types and application fields. However, there are also problems with standardization of reporting.
ObjectiveTo select the key questions of the reporting quality of acupuncture therapy network meta-analysis. MethodsA question pool about reporting quality of acupuncture therapy network meta-analysis was conducted by preliminary literature research and qualitative systematic review. A correspondence questionnaire was designed and the selection of key questions was carried out through two rounds of expert consultation using the Delphi method. ResultsA total of 21 key questions were selected for the network meta-analysis report standard of acupuncture, including whether to report details of acupuncture interventions (e.g., needle type, acupoints used, number of needles inserted, depth of needle insertion, retention time, needling techniques, and treatment duration), diagnostic criteria for diseases or traditional Chinese medicine syndromes, and qualifications of acupuncture practitioners. Of these, the only three key questions answered by the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and network meta-analysis (PRISMA-NMA) were summary, protocol and registration, and source of funding, while the remaining 19 were specific to acupuncture-related report standards. ConclusionThe conducted key question on reporting guideline of acupuncture network meta-analysis can improve the standardization and rigor of relevant research and better utilize its academic and clinical value.
Objective To summarize and analyze the working experience of hospital performance evaluation and reporting system in America, so as to provide decision support to China on such work as establishing objective, scientific and effective hospital performance evaluation system, strengthening government’s supervision to health service, and promoting hospitals’ sound development.Methods American official websites and databases were searched to include relative policies, reports and documents on hospitals’ performance evaluation. Results Typical hospital performance evaluation and reporting system in America included National Healthcare Quality Report (NHQR), Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and System (CAHPS), Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set (HEDIS), Leapfrog Group Evaluation System and Thomson Reuters 100 Top Hospitals. Conclusion The enlightenments of American performance performance evaluation systems to China include: a) more attention should be paid to performance evaluation; b) combined evaluation models and results application methods should be considered; c) comparatively scientific evaluation methods and comprehensive evaluation contents should be established.
N-of-1 trials are prospective clinical randomized cross-over controlled trials with multiple rounds of trial phase alternation designed with regard to a single patient. N-of-1 trials can provide clinical decision-makers with high-level evidence of the comparison of effect of intervention measures. Recently, an international team composed of many scholars published a SPIRIT extension for N-of-1 trials list (SPENT 2019) on the BMJ, with the purposes of clarifying the content design and improving the integrity and transparency of N-of-1 trial protocols. This article showed a detailed interpretation of the 14 main extension sub-items of the SPENT 2019 list with specific cases, aiming to further standardize the publication of domestic N-of-1 trials.
ObjectiveTo analyze the reporting and methodological quality of tranexamic acid meta-analyses published in Chinese journals. MethodsThe CNKI, WanFang Data, and CBM databases were electronically searched for meta-analyses of tranexamic acid from inception to August 12th, 2021. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data, and used AMSTAR 2 and PRISMA 2009 to assess the methodological and reporting quality of publications. ResultsA total of 68 meta-analyses were included. The identified meta-analyses required improvement for items 2, 3, 4, 7, 8, 10, 12, 15, and 16 in the AMSTAR 2, and items 2, 5, 8, 12, 15, 17, 22, 24, and 27 in the PRISMA 2009 assessments, respectively. The methodological and reporting quality scores were positively correlated (rs=0.36, P=0.002). Linear regression analysis identified the mentioning of PRISMA and funding support as the independent factors potentially affecting the reporting quality score (P<0.05). ConclusionsBoth the methodological and reporting quality of the tranexamic acid meta-analyses published in Chinese journals require improvement.
Purpose To study the possibility of prevention of proliferative vitreoretinopathy（PVR） by transduction of exogenous gene in vivo． Methods PVR model of rabbits was induced by intravitreal injection of fibroblasts．beta;-galactosidase (lacZ) gene as a reporter gene was transfered into the vitreous of PVR model eyes mediated by retroviral vector, and the expression of the gene in eye tissues was determined ． Gene transfection was done on the 6th day after fibroblasts injection,and the dosage of intravitreal injection of reporter gene was 0．1ml PLXSN/lacZ serum-free supernatant (1．1times;106 cfu/ml)． Results lacZ gene expression was seen in proliferative membranes after gene transfection, and the expression was located maily at the surface of PVR membrane．The reporter gene expression lasted at least more than 30 days．No expression was found in retinal tissues． Conclusions Retrovirus mediated gene can be directionally transducted in PVR membrane,and might possess the feasibility of gene therapy for PVR． (Chin J Ocul Fundus Dis, 2001,17:224-226)
The incidence of prostate cancer ranks the second in malignant tumors among elderly males. Multi-parametric MRI (Mp-MRI) is an important mean for detection, staging, and grading of prostate cancer. In order to standardize the collection, interpretation, and reporting of prostate MRI data, the European Urogenital Radiology Society launched the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) in 2012. Due to some limitations in the application process, the Joint Committee of the American Society of Radiology and the European Society of Radiology issued an updated version of PI-PADS V2 in 2014. In recent years, some studies have been carried out on the effectiveness, accuracy, and consistency of the diagnosis of prostate cancer. This article will review the application and research status of PI-RADS V2 system in the diagnosis of Mp-MRI for prostate cancer.
The surgical case report（SCARE）statement is the report checklist made by European researchers in 2016, which is specialized for surgical case report. As a reference for enhancing the research quality and transparency, the SCARE statement provides a fundamental framework for surgical case reports. The last SCARE statement was revised in 2020, and this paper interprets it to provide a practical tool for domestic researchers in surgical case report.