Hierarchy of evidence relating to hand surgery in Brazilian orthopedic journals

Sao Paulo Medical Journal

Vinícius Ynoe De Moraes²  João Carlos Belloti¹  Fábio Ynoe De Moraes¹  José Antonio Galbiatti¹  Evandro Pereira Palácio¹  João Baptista Gomes Dos Santos¹  Flávio Faloppa¹ 

[1] ,Universidade Federal de São Paulo Escola Paulista de Medicina São Paulo,Brazil

关键词: Orthopedics;    Hand;    Epidemiologic methods;    Research design;    Evidence-based medicine;    Ortopedia;    Mãos;    Métodos epidemiológicos;    Projetos de pesquisa;    Medicina baseada em evidências;   

DOI  :  10.1590/S1516-31802011000200007

来源: SciELO

【 摘 要 】

CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVE: There is no systematic assessment of the quality of scientific production in the specialty of hand surgery in our setting. This study aimed to systematically assess the status of evidence generation relating to hand surgery and to evaluate the reproducibility of the classification method based on an evidence pyramid. DESIGN AND SETTING: Secondary study conducted at Universidade Federal de São Paulo (Unifesp) and Faculdade Estadual de Medicina de Marília (Famema). METHODS: Two researchers independently conducted an electronic database search for hand surgery studies published between 2000 and 2009 in the two main Brazilian orthopedic journals (Acta Ortopédica Brasileira and Revista Brasileira de Ortopedia). The studies identified were subsequently classified according to methodological design (systematic review of the literature, randomized clinical trial, cohort study, case-control study, case series and other studies) and evidence level (I to V). RESULTS: A total of 1,150 articles were evaluated, and 83 (7.2%) were included in the final analysis. Studies with evidence level IV (case series) accounted for 41 (49%) of the published papers. Studies with evidence level V (other studies) accounted for 12 (14.5%) of the papers. Only two studies (2.4%) were ranked as level I or II. The inter-rater reproducibility was excellent (k = 0.94). CONCLUSIONS: Hand surgery articles corresponded to less than one tenth of Brazilian orthopedic production. Studies with evidence level IV were the commonest type. The reproducibility of the classification stratified by evidence level was almost perfect.

【 授权许可】

CC BY   
 All the contents of this journal, except where otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License