Steffen Mickenautsch, Stefan Rupf, Ivana Miletić, Veerasamy Yengopal
{"title":"综合质量评分(CQS)作为前瞻性对照临床治疗试验的评价工具:理论基础和现有证据。","authors":"Steffen Mickenautsch, Stefan Rupf, Ivana Miletić, Veerasamy Yengopal","doi":"10.2174/1574887118666230104152245","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Current evidence appraisal concepts, such as the Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach and Cochrane's Risk of Bias (RoB) tool, rely on assumptions related to the classic problem of inductive reasoning and may suffer from insufficient inter-rater reliability.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>The Composite Quality Score (CQS) has emerged as a possible trial appraisal tool that does not rely on inductive assumptions and has been shown to be of potentially very high inter-rater reliability.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Although the current CQS concept is still under development, its current evidence is encouraging and justifies further study. This article presents the rationale and currently available research concerning the CQS and shows where further research is required.</p>","PeriodicalId":21174,"journal":{"name":"Reviews on recent clinical trials","volume":"18 1","pages":"28-33"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Composite Quality Score (CQS) as an Appraisal Tool for Prospective, Controlled Clinical Therapy Trials: Rationale and Current Evidence.\",\"authors\":\"Steffen Mickenautsch, Stefan Rupf, Ivana Miletić, Veerasamy Yengopal\",\"doi\":\"10.2174/1574887118666230104152245\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Current evidence appraisal concepts, such as the Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach and Cochrane's Risk of Bias (RoB) tool, rely on assumptions related to the classic problem of inductive reasoning and may suffer from insufficient inter-rater reliability.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>The Composite Quality Score (CQS) has emerged as a possible trial appraisal tool that does not rely on inductive assumptions and has been shown to be of potentially very high inter-rater reliability.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Although the current CQS concept is still under development, its current evidence is encouraging and justifies further study. This article presents the rationale and currently available research concerning the CQS and shows where further research is required.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21174,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Reviews on recent clinical trials\",\"volume\":\"18 1\",\"pages\":\"28-33\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Reviews on recent clinical trials\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2174/1574887118666230104152245\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Reviews on recent clinical trials","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2174/1574887118666230104152245","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5
摘要
背景:目前的证据评估概念，如评估、发展和评价(GRADE)方法和Cochrane’s Risk of Bias (RoB)工具，依赖于与归纳推理经典问题相关的假设，可能存在评估者间信度不足的问题。讨论:综合质量评分(CQS)已成为一种可能的试验评估工具，它不依赖于归纳假设，并已被证明具有潜在的非常高的评分者之间的可靠性。结论:虽然目前的CQS概念仍处于发展阶段，但目前的证据令人鼓舞，并证明了进一步研究的合理性。本文介绍了CQS的基本原理和目前可用的研究，并指出了需要进一步研究的地方。
The Composite Quality Score (CQS) as an Appraisal Tool for Prospective, Controlled Clinical Therapy Trials: Rationale and Current Evidence.
Background: Current evidence appraisal concepts, such as the Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach and Cochrane's Risk of Bias (RoB) tool, rely on assumptions related to the classic problem of inductive reasoning and may suffer from insufficient inter-rater reliability.
Discussion: The Composite Quality Score (CQS) has emerged as a possible trial appraisal tool that does not rely on inductive assumptions and has been shown to be of potentially very high inter-rater reliability.
Conclusion: Although the current CQS concept is still under development, its current evidence is encouraging and justifies further study. This article presents the rationale and currently available research concerning the CQS and shows where further research is required.
期刊介绍：
Reviews on Recent Clinical Trials publishes frontier reviews on recent clinical trials of major importance. The journal"s aim is to publish the highest quality review articles in the field. Topics covered include: important Phase I – IV clinical trial studies, clinical investigations at all stages of development and therapeutics. The journal is essential reading for all researchers and clinicians involved in drug therapy and clinical trials.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
