您当前的位置: > 详细浏览

2021年中国基层卫生和全科医学研究方法学质量评价报告:定性研究和混合方法研究部分

请选择邀稿期刊:

Report on Methodological Quality Assessment of Primary Care and General Practice Research in China in 2021:Qualitative and Mixed Methods Research Section

摘要: 背景 全科医学具有显著的跨学科领域特征,定性和混合方法研究均适用于该领域的科研工作,近年来我国相关学术论文发表数量稳步增长,但整体文献质量情况尚未经过系统评估。目的 探明全科医学与基层卫生领域发表的定性研究和混合方法研究文献的方法学质量。方法 于 2022 年 8 月—2023 年 4 月,4 名研究人员采用质量评估项目(CASP)中的定性研究评价工具和混合方法评价工具(MMAT)分别对我国 2021 年全科医学与基层卫生领域发表的定性研究和混合方法研究进行了分析和方法学质量评价。研究人员两两分组独立进行信息提取和质量评价。结果 共纳入 35 篇定性研究文献及 9 篇混合方法研究文献。定性研究的主要问题包括:65.71%(23/35)的研究未充分考虑伦理学问题;94.29%(33/35)的研究未讨论招募参与者的问题;82.86%(29/35)的研究未充分考虑研究者和参与者之间的关系;42.86%(15/35)的研究样本量 <20 人,且 25.71%(9/35)的研究未讨论资料饱和问题。混合方法研究的主要问题包括 88.89%(8/9)的研究未明确报告混合方法研究设计类型,且 88.89%(8/9)的研究未能有效整合研究的不同组成部分以共同回答研究问题。结论 我国近年发表的全科医学及基层卫生领域的此类研究的方法学质量仍存在部分限制,尤其是在定性研究的伦理性、可靠性及信息饱和程度等方面和混合方法研究的整合方面受限严重,应进一步加强科研方法学的培训,并严格遵循科研设计和报告规范,以改善科研工作和所得证据的质量。
Abstract: Background General practice has significant interdisciplinary characteristics,both qualitative research and mixed-methods research are applicable to scientific research in this field. In recent years,there has been a steady increase in the number of relevant academic papers published in China,but the overall quality of the literature has not been systematically assessed. Objective To explore the methodological quality of qualitative and mixed methods research literature published in the field of general practice and primary care. Methods From August 2022 to April 2023,four investigators analyzed and assessed the methodological quality of qualitative and mixed methods studies published in the field of general practice and primary care in China in 2021 using the qualitative assessment tools of Critical Appraisal Skills Programme(CASP) and Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool(MMAT),respectively. The researchers were grouped in pairs and independently for information extraction and quality evaluation. Results A total of 35 qualitative research papers and 9 mixed methods research papers were included. Among the qualitative studies,23 literature(65.71%)did not sufficiently considered ethical issues;recruitment of participants was not discussed in 94.29%(33/35)of the studies;the relationship between the researcher and the participants was not adequately considered in 82.86% of the studies;42.86%(15/35)of the studies had a sample size of <20 participants and data saturation was not discussed in 25.71%(9/35)of the studies. Major problems with mixed-methods studies included the fact that:88.89% of the studies(8/9)did not explicitly report the type of mixed methods research design and 88.89% of the studies(8/9)failed to effectively integrate the different components of the study to answer the research question. Conclusion The methodological quality of such studies in general practice and primary care published in recent years in China is still partially limited,especially in the ethics,reliability and information saturation among qualitative studies,and the integration among mixed methods researches,which should be further strengthened by training in research methodology and strict adherence to research design and reporting statements in order to improve the quality of research and even evidence for decision making.

版本历史

[V1] 2023-11-29 15:44:01 ChinaXiv:202312.00011V1 下载全文
点击下载全文
预览
许可声明
metrics指标
  •  点击量98
  •  下载量4
评论
分享