文献类型：期刊文献

中文题名：质性研究系统评价在循证指南制定中的应用价值

英文题名：The Value of Systematic Reviews of Qualitative Research in Developing Evidence-based Guidelines

作者：赵瑞[1];拜争刚[1];黄崇斐[1];樊景春[2];靳英辉[3];陈昊[4];曾宪涛[5];邝心颖[6]

第一作者：赵瑞

机构：[1]兰州大学循证医学中心/甘肃省循证医学与临床转化重点实验室,兰州730000;[2]甘肃中医药大学公共卫生学院,兰州730000;[3]天津中医药大学护理学院/天津中医药大学循证护理中心,天津300193;[4]南京中医药大学第二临床医学院,南京210046;[5]湖北医药学院附属太和医院循证医学中心,湖北十堰442000;[6]四川大学华西医院中国循证医学中心,成都610041

第一机构：兰州大学循证医学中心/甘肃省循证医学与临床转化重点实验室,兰州730000

年份：2016

卷号：16

期号：7

起止页码：855

中文期刊名：中国循证医学杂志

外文期刊名：Chinese Journal of Evidence-based Medicine

收录：CSTPCD;;Scopus;CSCD:【CSCD_E2015_2016】；

基金：国家自然科学基金项目(编号:81301177);甘肃省留学回国人员科技活动项目择优资助(编号:20410404)

语种：中文

中文关键词：质性研究;系统评价;循证指南;知证决策

外文关键词：Qualitative research; Systematic review; Evidence-based guideline; Evidence-informed decision making

摘要：一部好的循证指南不仅需要考虑干预措施的有效性、经济性,还要考虑推荐措施在实施过程中的可接受性、可行性和公平性。质性研究系统评价可提供干预措施的可接受性和可行性等证据。质性研究系统评价证据在循证指南制定和临床决策中可以:1帮助明确指南应用范围;2评估干预措施的可接受性;3评估干预措施的可行性;4明确指南应用过程中的注意事项。采用CERQual证据分级系统对质性研究系统评价证据进行分级,科学合理地给出干预措施的可接受性和可行性分级意见,是循证指南制定的关键环节。本研究对质性研究系统评价在循证指南制定的应用价值做以阐述,并举例说明其如何参与知证决策。
A well-conducted evidence-based guideline not only considers the efficiency and the cost of the recommended intervention, but also the acceptability and feasibility of the intervention during implementation. Systematic reviews of qualitative research aim to provide qualitative evidence such as the acceptability and feasibility of the intervention. In developing evidence-based guidelines, qualitative evidence helps to： （1） Define the scope of guideline; （2） Assess the acceptability of interventions; （3） Assess the feasibility of interventions; （4） Identify considerations when implementing guidelines. Systematic reviews provide the fundamental evidence required to develop robust and trustworthy guidelines. The CERQual （Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research） approach aims to grade the evidence from systematic reviews of qualitative research. After critically and scientifically appraising by CERQual, the acceptance and feasibility of an intervention are given different grading, which is the critical process of developing evidence-based guidelines. This paper will demonstrate the value of systematic reviews of qualitative research in developing evidence-based guidelines and how to implement recommendations from qualitative evidence.