Comment on: Systematic review of functional outcome and quality of life after total pancreatectomy

Comment on: Systematic review of functional outcome and quality of life after total pancreatectomy


چاپ صفحه
پژوهان
صفحه نخست سامانه
چکیده مقاله
چکیده مقاله
نویسندگان
نویسندگان
دانلود مقاله
دانلود مقاله
دانشگاه علوم پزشکی تبریز
دانشگاه علوم پزشکی تبریز

نویسندگان: مهرداد امیر بهقدمی , علی جنتی , معصومه قلی زاده

کلمات کلیدی: Systematic review, Methodological issues, Critical appraisal

نشریه: 5350 , 5 , 107 , 2020

اطلاعات کلی مقاله
hide/show

نویسنده ثبت کننده مقاله علی جنتی
مرحله جاری مقاله تایید نهایی
دانشکده/مرکز مربوطه دانشکده مدیریت و اطلاع رسانی پزشکی
کد مقاله 71867
عنوان فارسی مقاله Comment on: Systematic review of functional outcome and quality of life after total pancreatectomy
عنوان لاتین مقاله Comment on: Systematic review of functional outcome and quality of life after total pancreatectomy
ناشر 3
آیا مقاله از طرح تحقیقاتی و یا منتورشیپ استخراج شده است؟ خیر
عنوان نشریه (خارج از لیست فوق)
نوع مقاله Letter to Editor
نحوه ایندکس شدن مقاله ایندکس شده سطح یک – ISI - Web of Science
آدرس لینک مقاله/ همایش در شبکه اینترنت

خلاصه مقاله
hide/show

We read with great interest the paper by Scholten et al.1. The aim of this systematic review was to focus on short‐ and long‐term functional outcomes after total pancreatectomy, and its impact on quality of life. Although the results of the review are valuable, there is a methodological issue about the study that we believe must be addressed by the authors. Inclusion and exclusion criteria need to be clarified in much more detail. To establish these criteria, each aspect of the research question must be defined clearly to clarify exactly what the authors wish to focus on. Depending on the subject, it is strongly recommended that the Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes and Study design (PICOS) is used2, 3. The Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions4 specifies using PICOS as a framework for developing a review question, thus ensuring that the relevant components of the question are well defined. PICOS is also focused primarily on treatment questions, although it can also be adapted to formulate prognostic or diagnostic research questions2. Despite the existence of other frameworks including sample, phenomenon of interest, design, evaluation, research type (SPIDER) and setting, perspective, intervention, comparison, evaluation (SPICE), PICOS is by far the most widely used framework for structuring clinical research questions and defining eligibility criteria in the literature search2. PICOS and selection of eligible studies form the cornerstone of systematic reviews that ensure homogeneity and reliability. Therefore, when carrying out systematic reviews, the PICOS framework should be taken seriously to retrieve all eligible studies and avoid a misleading response and incomplete results. We believe that this issue will be followed in future studies as this letter adds value to existing scientific literature and helps to improve the quality of the study.

نویسندگان
hide/show

نویسنده نفر چندم مقاله
مهرداد امیر بهقدمیاول
علی جنتیدوم
معصومه قلی زادهسوم

لینک دانلود مقاله
hide/show

نام فایل تاریخ درج فایل اندازه فایل دانلود
10.1002@bjs.11535.pdf1399/01/31139157دانلود
British Journal of Surgery-SJR.pdf1399/01/31271872دانلود