1. 北京中医药大学东直门医院
2. 中国中医科学院
纸质出版:2021
移动端阅览
[1]姚钰宁,曹克刚,托托,王凤兰,张华敏,丁侃,高颖.基于专家问卷的中医古籍证据分级及推荐方法的构建[J].中医杂志,2021,62(07):572-576.
YAO Yuning, CAO Kegang, TUO tuo, et al. Construction of Evidence Grading and Recommendation System for Ancient Chinese Medicine Books through Experts Questionnaire Survey[J]. Journal of Traditional Chinese Medicine2021, 62(7): 572-576.
[1]姚钰宁,曹克刚,托托,王凤兰,张华敏,丁侃,高颖.基于专家问卷的中医古籍证据分级及推荐方法的构建[J].中医杂志,2021,62(07):572-576. DOI: 10.13288/j.11-2166/r.2021.07.005.
YAO Yuning, CAO Kegang, TUO tuo, et al. Construction of Evidence Grading and Recommendation System for Ancient Chinese Medicine Books through Experts Questionnaire Survey[J]. Journal of Traditional Chinese Medicine2021, 62(7): 572-576. DOI: 10.13288/j.11-2166/r.2021.07.005.
目的构建中医古籍证据应用于中医临床实践指南的分级及推荐方法。方法设计调查问卷
内容包括中医古籍评分标准、中医古籍证据评分标准、中医古籍证据推荐级别标准各部分具体条目及赋分;遴选中医或中西医结合临床医学、医史文献学专家进行问卷调查。采集并分析调查问卷中各评价条目的一致性
评价数据及条目权重分配的重要性评价数据
并结合专家论证
构建中医古籍证据分级及推荐方案。结果共遴选专家30名
发放调查问卷30份
回收30份
问卷回收率为100%。中医古籍评分包括引用量、作者及出处因素2个条目
其中引用量包括目录著录量、被摘量、著录量、丛书采用量4个子条目
评分以5分为满分;作者及出处因素分为官修文献及著名作者所作、知名作者所作、一般作者所作3个等级
分别计5、3、1分。中医古籍证据评分标准包括证据背景、证据评价2个条目
其中证据背景包括文献背景及引用情况2个子条目
5分为满分;证据评价包括患者自评、医家评价和相关人员的他评3个子条目
5分为满分。中医古籍证据评分即证据背景得分和证据评价得分之和
其划分界值为7分、4分。根据得分情况最终形成中医古籍证据推荐意见分级标准:中医古籍证据评分7(含)~10分(含)为Ⅰ级证据
强推荐;中医古籍证据评分4(含)~7分为Ⅱ级证据
弱推荐;中医古籍证据评分0~4分为Ⅲ级证据
无法做出推荐;中医古籍证据评分0分
Ⅲ级证据
不推荐。结论初步构建了包括中医古籍评分、中医古籍证据评分、中医古籍证据推荐级别标准三部分的中医证据分级及推荐方案
可为中医古籍证据应用于中医临床实践指南提供依据。
Objective To develop the ancient evidence grading and recommendation system for adopting evidence from traditional Chinese medicine(TCM) ancient books in developing clinical practice guidelines. Methods A questionnaire was designed to explore the evaluation standards of ancient TCM books
ancient evidence grading
and ancient evidence recommendation. Experts in TCM
integrated traditional Chinese and Western medicine
and TCM medical history document were surveyed. Each item score and their weights were calculated after consistency and importance evaluation analysis. After reaching the experts consensus
the ancient evidence grading and recommendation system was finally formulated. Results Thirty questionnaires were sent and returned; and the response rate was 100%. The evaluation of ancient TCM books included cited situation and author items; Cited situation item had four sub-items including catalog cited
abstract cited
book cited and book series cited
each with a full score of 5 points
while author item classified the documents into official or famous authors level
well-known authors level
and general authors level
each rated as 5
3 and 1 point. The ancient evidence grading standard included two items: evidence background and evidence evaluation; evidence background focused on literature background and citation
while evidence evaluation included patient self-evaluation
medical evaluation and evaluations of other related personnel
each with a five-point full score; the score of evidence background and that of evidence evaluation were summed up as the score of ancient evidence score
which was graded into different levels with thresholds of 4 and 7 points. Accordingly
the evidence recommendation standards were formulated
which were strongly recommended(level Ⅰ
≥7 and ≤10 points)
weakly recommended(level Ⅱ
≥4 and <7 points)
unclearly recommended(level Ⅲ
>0 and <4 points) and not recommended(level Ⅲ
0 points). Conclusion The ancient evidence grading and re-commendation system is developed by clearly defining the standards of ancient TCM books
ancient evidence grading
and ancient evidence recommendation
which can be used to adopt evidence from ancient books in developing TCM clinical practice guidelines
0
浏览量
48
下载量
19
CSCD
关联资源
相关文章
相关作者
相关机构
京公网安备11010102007558号