Assessing the Level of Evidence of Presented Studies at the Brazilian Congress of Coloproctology

Q4 Medicine
Hugo Samartine Junior, Lucas Rosasco Mazzini, Daniel Ferreira Paiva, Nicole Goldenberg Levy, Lauro Igor Silva, José Luís Braga de Aquino, Elisa Donalisio Teixeira Mendes
{"title":"Assessing the Level of Evidence of Presented Studies at the Brazilian Congress of Coloproctology","authors":"Hugo Samartine Junior, Lucas Rosasco Mazzini, Daniel Ferreira Paiva, Nicole Goldenberg Levy, Lauro Igor Silva, José Luís Braga de Aquino, Elisa Donalisio Teixeira Mendes","doi":"10.1055/s-0043-1772782","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Introduction Scientific studies in Brazil grew around 10.7% compared to previous years. However, the level of quality of evidence has been decreasing. The aim in our study is to examine the meeting abstracts of the Brazilian congress of coloproctology and analyze the level of evidence in trends and variables. Methods A descriptive bibliometric study, working with secondary data to review scientific abstracts in the annals of the coloproctology congress from 2015 to 2019. Results A total of 1756 abstracts of the Brazilian Congress of Coloproctology were analyzed for 5 years (2015-2019). There was a higher trend of abstracts presented with lower levels of evidence (level of evidence 5: 52.3% and 3: 30%), being the majority composed of case reports (49.4%) and retrospective studies (30.4%). The last two years analyzed (2018: 55.2% and 2019: 59.3%) had a predominance above average of case reports. From 2017 to 2019 there was a significant decrease in the number of level 2 evidence studies (18.10%,11.80% and 5.50%), while the number of studies with level 5 evidence showed an increase (45.60%, 56.60% and 61.40%). Statistical analysis occurred in only 17%, with an important decrease for the last two years (2018: 13.6%; 2019: 12.1%). Conclusions Although the data of this study is from the Brazilian coloproctology point of view, they are important for the global scientific community, as they allow a quantitative evaluation of the relative contribution from the level of evidence of Brazilian coloproctology researchers to the scientific scenario.","PeriodicalId":15408,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Coloproctology","volume":"129 9","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Coloproctology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0043-1772782","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract Introduction Scientific studies in Brazil grew around 10.7% compared to previous years. However, the level of quality of evidence has been decreasing. The aim in our study is to examine the meeting abstracts of the Brazilian congress of coloproctology and analyze the level of evidence in trends and variables. Methods A descriptive bibliometric study, working with secondary data to review scientific abstracts in the annals of the coloproctology congress from 2015 to 2019. Results A total of 1756 abstracts of the Brazilian Congress of Coloproctology were analyzed for 5 years (2015-2019). There was a higher trend of abstracts presented with lower levels of evidence (level of evidence 5: 52.3% and 3: 30%), being the majority composed of case reports (49.4%) and retrospective studies (30.4%). The last two years analyzed (2018: 55.2% and 2019: 59.3%) had a predominance above average of case reports. From 2017 to 2019 there was a significant decrease in the number of level 2 evidence studies (18.10%,11.80% and 5.50%), while the number of studies with level 5 evidence showed an increase (45.60%, 56.60% and 61.40%). Statistical analysis occurred in only 17%, with an important decrease for the last two years (2018: 13.6%; 2019: 12.1%). Conclusions Although the data of this study is from the Brazilian coloproctology point of view, they are important for the global scientific community, as they allow a quantitative evaluation of the relative contribution from the level of evidence of Brazilian coloproctology researchers to the scientific scenario.
评估在巴西口腔病学大会上提出的研究的证据水平
与前几年相比,巴西的科学研究增长了10.7%左右。然而,证据的质量水平一直在下降。在我们的研究目的是检查会议摘要的巴西大会直肠和分析的证据水平的趋势和变量。方法采用描述性文献计量学研究,利用二手资料对2015 - 2019年结肠直肠学大会年鉴中的科学摘要进行综述。结果对2015-2019年5年巴西结肠直肠学大会的1756篇摘要进行分析。证据水平较低的摘要呈较高趋势(证据水平分别为5:52 .3%和3:30 %),以病例报告(49.4%)和回顾性研究(30.4%)为主。过去两年(2018年:55.2%和2019年:59.3%)的病例报告高于平均水平。2017 - 2019年,2级证据研究数量显著减少(分别为18.10%、11.80%和5.50%),5级证据研究数量显著增加(分别为45.60%、56.60%和61.40%)。统计分析仅占17%,过去两年大幅下降(2018年:13.6%;2019年:12.1%)。尽管本研究的数据来自巴西肛肠学的观点,但它们对全球科学界很重要,因为它们允许对巴西肛肠学研究人员的证据水平对科学情景的相对贡献进行定量评估。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Coloproctology
Journal of Coloproctology Medicine-Gastroenterology
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
41
审稿时长
47 weeks
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信