Navegando por Palavras-chave "Projetos de pesquisa"

Agora exibindo 1 - 3 de 3
  • Imagem de Miniatura
    Item
    Acesso aberto (Open Access)
    Design and level of evidence of studies published in two Brazilian medical journals recently indexed in the ISI Web of Science database
    (Associação Paulista de Medicina - APM, 2010-07-01) Torloni, Maria Regina [UNIFESP]; Riera, Rachel [UNIFESP]; Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)
    CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVES: The level of evidence and methodological quality of articles published in medical journals are important aids for clinicians in decision-making and also affect journals' impact factor. Although systematic reviews (SR) are considered to represent the highest level of evidence, their methodological quality is not homogeneous and they need to be as carefully assessed as other types of study. This study aimed to assess the design and level of evidence of articles published in 2007, in two recently indexed Brazilian journals (Clinics and Revista da Associação Médica Brasileira), and to evaluate the methodological quality of the SRs. DESIGN AND SETTING: Descriptive study developed in the Brazilian Cochrane Center, Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP). METHODS: All 289 published articles were classified according to types of study design and level of evidence. The SRs were critically appraised by two evaluators using the AMSTAR tool. RESULTS: The most frequent design types were cross-sectional studies (39.9%), case reports (15.8%), experimental studies (10.8%) and narrative reviews (7.4%). According to the Oxford criteria, 25.6% of the articles were classified as level 4 or 5 evidence, while 2.8% were level 1. SRs represented only 2% of the published articles and their methodological quality scores were low. CONCLUSIONS: The main design types among the published papers were observational and experimental studies and narrative reviews. SRs accounted for a small proportion of the articles and had low methodological scores. Brazilian medical journals need to encourage publication of greater numbers of clinically relevant papers of high methodological quality.
  • Imagem de Miniatura
    Item
    Acesso aberto (Open Access)
    Designs of studies published in two Brazilian journals of orthopedics and sports medicine, recently indexed in the ISI Web of Science
    (Associação Paulista de Medicina - APM, 2009-11-01) Riera, Rachel [UNIFESP]; Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)
    CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVE: The methodology and relevance of articles are among the keystones for promoting their citation and increasing journals' impact factors. Study designs appropriate for answering the questions and adequate sample sizes have the aim of reducing the risk of bias. This study evaluated the articles published in two Brazilian journals of orthopedics and sports medicine that were recently indexed in the ISI Web of Science, regarding study design, sample size calculation, randomization and blinding. DESIGN AND SETTING: Descriptive study at Brazilian Cochrane Center. METHODS: Through a manual search, all original manuscripts published in 2007 in Acta Ortopédica Brasileira and Revista Brasileira de Medicina do Esporte were selected and evaluated. RESULTS: All the 60 articles published in Acta Ortopédica Brasileira and the 87 articles in Revista Brasileira de Medicina do Esporte were included and evaluated. The commonest design in Acta Ortopédica Brasileira was experimental studies (n = 19) and in Revista Brasileira de Medicina do Esporte, update or review articles (n =14). Sample calculations were seen in a minority of the articles. None of the eight clinical trials published presented sample calculations or adequate randomization processes. Three were described as blinded, but none described the measures taken to prevent disclosure of the allocation concealment. CONCLUSIONS: Publication of studies of good methodological quality other than review and experimental studies should be strongly encouraged among Brazilian journals, with the aim of increasing their citation and therefore their impact factor.
  • Imagem de Miniatura
    Item
    Acesso aberto (Open Access)
    Hierarchy of evidence relating to hand surgery in Brazilian orthopedic journals
    (Associação Paulista de Medicina - APM, 2011-03-01) Moraes, Vinícius Ynoe de [UNIFESP]; Belloti, Joao Carlos [UNIFESP]; Moraes, Fábio Ynoe de; Galbiatti, José Antonio; Palácio, Evandro Pereira; Santos, João Baptista Gomes dos [UNIFESP]; Faloppa, Flávio [UNIFESP]; Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP); Faculdade Estadual de Medicina de Marília; Faculdade Estadual de Medicina de Marília Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology
    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.