2000 年至 2023 年的神经介入调查:系统回顾。

IF 4.5 1区 医学 Q1 NEUROIMAGING
Salome Lou Bosshart, Alexander Stebner, Charlotte Sabine Weyland, Răzvan Alexandru Radu, Johanna Maria Ospel
{"title":"2000 年至 2023 年的神经介入调查:系统回顾。","authors":"Salome Lou Bosshart, Alexander Stebner, Charlotte Sabine Weyland, Răzvan Alexandru Radu, Johanna Maria Ospel","doi":"10.1136/jnis-2024-022298","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Surveys are increasingly used in neurointervention to gauge physicians' and patients' attitudes, practice patterns, and 'real-world' treatment strategies, particularly in conditions for which few, or no evidence-based, recommendations exist. While survey-based studies can provide valuable insights into real-world problems and management strategies, there is an inherent risk of bias.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To assess key themes, sample characteristics, response metrics, and report frequencies of quality indicators of neurointerventional surveys.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic review compliant with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guideline was performed. The PubMed database was searched for neurointerventional surveys published between 2000 and 2023. Survey topics, design, respondent characteristics, and survey quality criteria suggested by the Consensus-Based Checklist for Reporting of Survey Studies (CROSS) were assessed and described using descriptive statistics. Response rates and numbers of participants were further assessed for their dependence on sample characteristics and survey methodologies.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 122 surveys were included in this analysis. The number of surveys published each year increased steeply between 2000 (n=1) and 2023 (n=14). The most common survey topics were stroke (51/122, 41.8%) and aneurysm treatment (49/122, 40.2%). The median response rate was 58.5% (IQR=30.4-86.3), with a median number of respondents of 79 (IQR=50-201). Sixty-eight of 122 (55.7%) surveys published the questionnaire used for data collection. Only a subset of studies reported response rates (n=89, 73%), data collection time period (n=91, 74.6%), and strategies to prevent duplicate responses (n=57, 46.7%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Surveys are increasingly used by neurointerventional researchers, particularly to assess real-world practice patterns in endovascular stroke and aneurysm treatment. Adapting best-practice guidelines like the CROSS checklist might improve homogeneity and quality in neurointerventional survey research.</p>","PeriodicalId":16411,"journal":{"name":"Journal of NeuroInterventional Surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Neurointerventional surveys between 2000 and 2023: a systematic review.\",\"authors\":\"Salome Lou Bosshart, Alexander Stebner, Charlotte Sabine Weyland, Răzvan Alexandru Radu, Johanna Maria Ospel\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/jnis-2024-022298\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Surveys are increasingly used in neurointervention to gauge physicians' and patients' attitudes, practice patterns, and 'real-world' treatment strategies, particularly in conditions for which few, or no evidence-based, recommendations exist. While survey-based studies can provide valuable insights into real-world problems and management strategies, there is an inherent risk of bias.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To assess key themes, sample characteristics, response metrics, and report frequencies of quality indicators of neurointerventional surveys.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic review compliant with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guideline was performed. The PubMed database was searched for neurointerventional surveys published between 2000 and 2023. Survey topics, design, respondent characteristics, and survey quality criteria suggested by the Consensus-Based Checklist for Reporting of Survey Studies (CROSS) were assessed and described using descriptive statistics. Response rates and numbers of participants were further assessed for their dependence on sample characteristics and survey methodologies.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 122 surveys were included in this analysis. The number of surveys published each year increased steeply between 2000 (n=1) and 2023 (n=14). The most common survey topics were stroke (51/122, 41.8%) and aneurysm treatment (49/122, 40.2%). The median response rate was 58.5% (IQR=30.4-86.3), with a median number of respondents of 79 (IQR=50-201). Sixty-eight of 122 (55.7%) surveys published the questionnaire used for data collection. Only a subset of studies reported response rates (n=89, 73%), data collection time period (n=91, 74.6%), and strategies to prevent duplicate responses (n=57, 46.7%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Surveys are increasingly used by neurointerventional researchers, particularly to assess real-world practice patterns in endovascular stroke and aneurysm treatment. Adapting best-practice guidelines like the CROSS checklist might improve homogeneity and quality in neurointerventional survey research.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16411,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of NeuroInterventional Surgery\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of NeuroInterventional Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/jnis-2024-022298\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"NEUROIMAGING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of NeuroInterventional Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/jnis-2024-022298","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NEUROIMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:神经干预中越来越多地使用调查来衡量医生和患者的态度、实践模式以及 "真实世界 "的治疗策略,尤其是在很少或没有循证建议的情况下。虽然基于调查的研究可以为了解真实世界的问题和管理策略提供有价值的见解,但也存在固有的偏差风险:评估神经介入调查的关键主题、样本特征、响应度量以及质量指标的报告频率:方法:按照《系统综述和元分析首选报告项目》(PRISMA)指南进行系统综述。在 PubMed 数据库中搜索了 2000 年至 2023 年间发表的神经介入调查。采用描述性统计方法对调查主题、设计、受访者特征以及调查研究报告共识核对表 (CROSS) 建议的调查质量标准进行了评估和描述。此外,还进一步评估了回复率和参与者人数对样本特征和调查方法的依赖性:本次分析共纳入了 122 项调查。从 2000 年(n=1)到 2023 年(n=14),每年发布的调查数量急剧增加。最常见的调查主题是中风(51/122,41.8%)和动脉瘤治疗(49/122,40.2%)。回复率中位数为 58.5%(IQR=30.4-86.3),回复人数中位数为 79 人(IQR=50-201)。122 项调查中有 68 项(55.7%)公布了用于收集数据的问卷。只有一部分研究报告了回复率(89 份,73%)、数据收集时间段(91 份,74.6%)和防止重复回复的策略(57 份,46.7%):结论:神经介入研究人员越来越多地使用调查,尤其是评估血管内卒中和动脉瘤治疗的实际实践模式。采用 CROSS 核对表等最佳实践指南可提高神经介入调查研究的一致性和质量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Neurointerventional surveys between 2000 and 2023: a systematic review.

Background: Surveys are increasingly used in neurointervention to gauge physicians' and patients' attitudes, practice patterns, and 'real-world' treatment strategies, particularly in conditions for which few, or no evidence-based, recommendations exist. While survey-based studies can provide valuable insights into real-world problems and management strategies, there is an inherent risk of bias.

Objective: To assess key themes, sample characteristics, response metrics, and report frequencies of quality indicators of neurointerventional surveys.

Methods: A systematic review compliant with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guideline was performed. The PubMed database was searched for neurointerventional surveys published between 2000 and 2023. Survey topics, design, respondent characteristics, and survey quality criteria suggested by the Consensus-Based Checklist for Reporting of Survey Studies (CROSS) were assessed and described using descriptive statistics. Response rates and numbers of participants were further assessed for their dependence on sample characteristics and survey methodologies.

Results: A total of 122 surveys were included in this analysis. The number of surveys published each year increased steeply between 2000 (n=1) and 2023 (n=14). The most common survey topics were stroke (51/122, 41.8%) and aneurysm treatment (49/122, 40.2%). The median response rate was 58.5% (IQR=30.4-86.3), with a median number of respondents of 79 (IQR=50-201). Sixty-eight of 122 (55.7%) surveys published the questionnaire used for data collection. Only a subset of studies reported response rates (n=89, 73%), data collection time period (n=91, 74.6%), and strategies to prevent duplicate responses (n=57, 46.7%).

Conclusion: Surveys are increasingly used by neurointerventional researchers, particularly to assess real-world practice patterns in endovascular stroke and aneurysm treatment. Adapting best-practice guidelines like the CROSS checklist might improve homogeneity and quality in neurointerventional survey research.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
9.50
自引率
14.60%
发文量
291
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of NeuroInterventional Surgery (JNIS) is a leading peer review journal for scientific research and literature pertaining to the field of neurointerventional surgery. The journal launch follows growing professional interest in neurointerventional techniques for the treatment of a range of neurological and vascular problems including stroke, aneurysms, brain tumors, and spinal compression.The journal is owned by SNIS and is also the official journal of the Interventional Chapter of the Australian and New Zealand Society of Neuroradiology (ANZSNR), the Canadian Interventional Neuro Group, the Hong Kong Neurological Society (HKNS) and the Neuroradiological Society of Taiwan.
×
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