Contemporary trends in the level of evidence in general thoracic surgery clinical research

Author:

Choe Se-In1,Ben-Avi Ronny1,Begum Housne1,Pearce Kendra1,Mehta Meera1,Agzarian John1,Finley Christian J1,Hanna Waël C1,Farrokhyar Forough12,Shargall Yaron1

Affiliation:

1. Department of Surgery, Division of Thoracic Surgery, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada

2. Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada

Abstract

Abstract OBJECTIVES The large volume of scientific publications and the increasing emphasis on high-quality evidence for clinical decision-making present daily challenges to all clinicians, including thoracic surgeons. The objective of this study was to evaluate the contemporary trend in the level of evidence (LOE) for thoracic surgery clinical research. METHODS All clinical research articles published between January 2010 and December 2017 in 3 major general thoracic surgery journals were reviewed. Five authors independently reviewed the abstracts of each publication and assigned a LOE to each of them using the 2011 Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine classification scheme. Data extracted from eligible abstracts included study type, study size, country of primary author and type of study designs. Three auditing processes were conducted to establish working definitions and the process was validated with a research methodologist and 2 senior thoracic surgeons. Intra-class correlation coefficient was calculated to assess inter-rater agreement. Chi-square test and Spearman correlation analysis were then used to compare the LOE between journals and by year of publication. RESULTS Of 2028 publications reviewed and scored, 29 (1.4%) were graded level I, 75 (3.7%) were graded level II, 471 (23.2%) were graded level III, 1420 (70.2%) were graded level IV and 33 (1.6%) were graded level V (lowest level). Most publications (94.9%) were of lower-level evidence (III–V). There was an overall increasing trend in the lower LOE (P < 0.001). Inter-rater reliability was substantial with 95.5% (95%, confidence interval: 0.95–0.96) level of agreement between reviewers. CONCLUSIONS General thoracic surgery literature consists mostly of lower LOE studies. The number of lower levels of evidence is dominating the recent publications, potentially indicating a need to increase the commitment to produce and disseminate higher-level evidence in general thoracic surgery.

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine,Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine,General Medicine,Surgery

Reference24 articles.

1. Rules of evidence and clinical recommendations on the use of antithrombotic agents;Sackett;Chest,1986

2. Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn’t;Sackett;BMJ,1996

3. Evidence-based medicine;Bernstein;J Am Acad Orthop Surg,2004

4. Hierarchy of evidence: a framework for ranking evidence evaluating healthcare intervention;Evans;JCN,2002

5. Levels of evidence: a comparison between top medical journals and general pediatric journals;Jacobson;BMC Pediatr,2015

Cited by 4 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3