当代外科试验的特点、结果和报告:系统回顾和分析

IF 1.1 Q3 SURGERY
N. Bryce Robinson , Ajita Naik , Irbaz Hameed , Yongle Ruan , Mohamed Rahouma , Viola Weidenmann , Marco A. Zenati , Deepak L. Bhatt , Leonard N. Girardi , Paul Kurlansky , Shahzad G. Raja , David Moher , Stephen Fremes , Joanna Chikwe , Mario Gaudino
{"title":"当代外科试验的特点、结果和报告:系统回顾和分析","authors":"N. Bryce Robinson ,&nbsp;Ajita Naik ,&nbsp;Irbaz Hameed ,&nbsp;Yongle Ruan ,&nbsp;Mohamed Rahouma ,&nbsp;Viola Weidenmann ,&nbsp;Marco A. Zenati ,&nbsp;Deepak L. Bhatt ,&nbsp;Leonard N. Girardi ,&nbsp;Paul Kurlansky ,&nbsp;Shahzad G. Raja ,&nbsp;David Moher ,&nbsp;Stephen Fremes ,&nbsp;Joanna Chikwe ,&nbsp;Mario Gaudino","doi":"10.1016/j.isjp.2020.03.002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>The complexities and risks inherent to the field of surgery and surgical interventions present unique challenges to the design and analysis of surgical randomized controlled trials (RCT). Prior studies have investigated the practical and methodologic challenges posed by surgical RCTs. To date, however, a comprehensive analysis of the contemporary literature across multiple surgical subspecialties does not exist. In this descriptive analysis, we set out to characterize surgical RCTs over the past 10 years across six major surgical specialties.</p></div><div><h3>Methods and analysis</h3><p>A literature search by a medical librarian will be performed to identify all surgical randomized clinical trials published between January 2009 and December 2019 in the two journals with the highest impact factor for six surgical specialties as well as two large general medicine journals. Two reviewers will independently screen the citations retrieved from the literature search and extract data according to a previously described protocol via a pre-defined data collection form. Categorical variables will be reported as counts and percentages. Following assessment of normality, continuous variables will be reported as mean (standard deviation) or median (inter-quartile range). Based on normality of data, independent t-test or the Mann-Whitney U test will be used to compare continuous variables and chi-square and Fisher’s exact tests to compare categorical variables. Comparisons across multiple sets will be performed using ANOVA or Kruskak-Wallis tests. Two-sided significance testing will be used and a p-value &lt;0.05 will be considered significant without adjustment for multiple testing. All analyses will be performed using SPSS version 24 and R within RStudio. PROSPERO (ID number: 162797).</p></div><div><h3>Ethics and dissemination</h3><p>There are no ethical concerns directly pertinent to this systematic review. The retrieved data will be made available upon request. The study will be written in English and submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":42077,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Surgery Protocols","volume":"21 ","pages":"Pages 1-4"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.isjp.2020.03.002","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Characteristics, results, and reporting of contemporary surgical trials: A systematic review and analysis\",\"authors\":\"N. Bryce Robinson ,&nbsp;Ajita Naik ,&nbsp;Irbaz Hameed ,&nbsp;Yongle Ruan ,&nbsp;Mohamed Rahouma ,&nbsp;Viola Weidenmann ,&nbsp;Marco A. Zenati ,&nbsp;Deepak L. Bhatt ,&nbsp;Leonard N. Girardi ,&nbsp;Paul Kurlansky ,&nbsp;Shahzad G. Raja ,&nbsp;David Moher ,&nbsp;Stephen Fremes ,&nbsp;Joanna Chikwe ,&nbsp;Mario Gaudino\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.isjp.2020.03.002\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>The complexities and risks inherent to the field of surgery and surgical interventions present unique challenges to the design and analysis of surgical randomized controlled trials (RCT). Prior studies have investigated the practical and methodologic challenges posed by surgical RCTs. To date, however, a comprehensive analysis of the contemporary literature across multiple surgical subspecialties does not exist. In this descriptive analysis, we set out to characterize surgical RCTs over the past 10 years across six major surgical specialties.</p></div><div><h3>Methods and analysis</h3><p>A literature search by a medical librarian will be performed to identify all surgical randomized clinical trials published between January 2009 and December 2019 in the two journals with the highest impact factor for six surgical specialties as well as two large general medicine journals. Two reviewers will independently screen the citations retrieved from the literature search and extract data according to a previously described protocol via a pre-defined data collection form. Categorical variables will be reported as counts and percentages. Following assessment of normality, continuous variables will be reported as mean (standard deviation) or median (inter-quartile range). Based on normality of data, independent t-test or the Mann-Whitney U test will be used to compare continuous variables and chi-square and Fisher’s exact tests to compare categorical variables. Comparisons across multiple sets will be performed using ANOVA or Kruskak-Wallis tests. Two-sided significance testing will be used and a p-value &lt;0.05 will be considered significant without adjustment for multiple testing. All analyses will be performed using SPSS version 24 and R within RStudio. PROSPERO (ID number: 162797).</p></div><div><h3>Ethics and dissemination</h3><p>There are no ethical concerns directly pertinent to this systematic review. The retrieved data will be made available upon request. The study will be written in English and submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":42077,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Surgery Protocols\",\"volume\":\"21 \",\"pages\":\"Pages 1-4\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.isjp.2020.03.002\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Surgery Protocols\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2468357420300097\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Surgery Protocols","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2468357420300097","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

外科和外科干预领域固有的复杂性和风险给外科随机对照试验(RCT)的设计和分析带来了独特的挑战。先前的研究已经调查了外科随机对照试验带来的实践和方法上的挑战。然而,到目前为止,对跨多个外科亚专科的当代文献的综合分析还不存在。在这一描述性分析中,我们开始对过去10年六个主要外科专业的外科随机对照试验进行特征分析。方法和分析由医学图书管理员进行文献检索,以确定2009年1月至2019年12月期间在六个外科专科影响因子最高的两种期刊和两个大型普通医学期刊上发表的所有外科随机临床试验。两名审稿人将独立筛选从文献检索中检索到的引文,并根据先前描述的方案通过预定义的数据收集表提取数据。分类变量将以计数和百分比报告。在评估正态性后,连续变量将以平均值(标准差)或中位数(四分位数间距)报告。根据数据的正态性,将使用独立t检验或Mann-Whitney U检验来比较连续变量,使用卡方检验和Fisher精确检验来比较分类变量。多组间的比较将使用方差分析或Kruskak-Wallis检验进行。将使用双侧显著性检验,p值<0.05将被认为显著,无需调整多重检验。所有的分析将使用SPSS版本24和RStudio内的R进行。普洛斯彼罗(身份证号:162797)。伦理与传播本系统综述不涉及直接相关的伦理问题。检索到的数据将根据要求提供。该研究将用英文撰写,并提交给同行评议的期刊发表。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Characteristics, results, and reporting of contemporary surgical trials: A systematic review and analysis

Introduction

The complexities and risks inherent to the field of surgery and surgical interventions present unique challenges to the design and analysis of surgical randomized controlled trials (RCT). Prior studies have investigated the practical and methodologic challenges posed by surgical RCTs. To date, however, a comprehensive analysis of the contemporary literature across multiple surgical subspecialties does not exist. In this descriptive analysis, we set out to characterize surgical RCTs over the past 10 years across six major surgical specialties.

Methods and analysis

A literature search by a medical librarian will be performed to identify all surgical randomized clinical trials published between January 2009 and December 2019 in the two journals with the highest impact factor for six surgical specialties as well as two large general medicine journals. Two reviewers will independently screen the citations retrieved from the literature search and extract data according to a previously described protocol via a pre-defined data collection form. Categorical variables will be reported as counts and percentages. Following assessment of normality, continuous variables will be reported as mean (standard deviation) or median (inter-quartile range). Based on normality of data, independent t-test or the Mann-Whitney U test will be used to compare continuous variables and chi-square and Fisher’s exact tests to compare categorical variables. Comparisons across multiple sets will be performed using ANOVA or Kruskak-Wallis tests. Two-sided significance testing will be used and a p-value <0.05 will be considered significant without adjustment for multiple testing. All analyses will be performed using SPSS version 24 and R within RStudio. PROSPERO (ID number: 162797).

Ethics and dissemination

There are no ethical concerns directly pertinent to this systematic review. The retrieved data will be made available upon request. The study will be written in English and submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal.

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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
12
期刊介绍: IJS Protocols is the first peer-reviewed, international, open access journal seeking to publish research protocols across across the full breadth of the surgical field. We are aim to provide rapid submission to decision times whilst maintaining a high quality peer-review process.
×
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