Journal of Acupuncture Research

  • 제27권1호
  • /
  • Pages.109-116
  • /
  • 2010
  • /
  • 2586-288X(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2586-2898(eISSN)
대한침구의학회 (Korean Acupuncture & Moxibustion Medicine Society)
권호 표지

$\ll$대한침구학회지\gg$에 실린 중재 관련 비무작위 비교연구논문의 질적 평가

Quality Assessment of Non-randomised Comparative Clinical Studies in The Journal of Korean Acupuncture and Moxibustion Society

  • 선종인 (경희대학교 한의과대학 침구학교실) ;
  • 백용현 (경희대학교 한의과대학 침구학교실) ;
  • 이상훈 (경희대학교 한의과대학 침구학교실) ;
  • 이재동 (경희대학교 한의과대학 침구학교실)
  • Seon, Jong-In (Dept. of Acupuncture & Moxibustion, College of Oriental medicine, Kyung Hee University) ;
  • Baek, Yong-Hyeon (Dept. of Acupuncture & Moxibustion, College of Oriental medicine, Kyung Hee University) ;
  • Lee, Sang-Hoon (Dept. of Acupuncture & Moxibustion, College of Oriental medicine, Kyung Hee University) ;
  • Lee, Jae-Dong (Dept. of Acupuncture & Moxibustion, College of Oriental medicine, Kyung Hee University)
  • 투고 : 2010.01.11
  • 심사 : 2010.01.28
  • 발행 : 2010.02.20
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

Objectives : Since The Journal of Korean Acupuncture and Moxibustion Society(JKAMS) started publishing in 1984, randomised controlled trials(RCTs) and non-randomised clinical studies(NRSs) consistently have increased in quality and quantity. There has been no study on quality assessment of NRSs. Thus, this study evaluted non-randomised comparative clinical trials in the JKAMS to assess the quantity and quality. Methods : Upon extracting NRSs for assessing the intervention effects from all the articles published in the JKAMS from 1984 to 2009, assessments were made on methodological index for non-randomised studies(MINORS). Also, the analysis were made upon the proportion of non-randomised comparative clinical trials within original articles. The mean scores by research methods and years, and total scores and mean scores of yearly research methods were analyzed. Results : A total of 44 trials on non-randomised comparative clinical trials were selected. In 1980s, 4.3% of the total selected original articles, in 1990s, 4.1%, and in 2000s 14.2% were NRSs. According to the research designs, the mean scores of MINORS were Case-control study 18.3, Controlled before and after 18.5, Quasi randomised trial 18.5, and non randomised trial 17.9(out of 24), respectively. Cross-sectional study was the most frequently used(41.9%). Conclusion : Although NRSs consistently increased in quantity, the assessed mean scores were low and most articles used Cross-sectional study. Thus, there should be studied using appropriate research methods in the future.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Deeks JJ, Dinnes J, D'Amico R, Sakarovitch C, Song F et al. Evaluating non-randomised intervention studies. Health Technol Assess. 2003 ; 7 : 1-173.
  2. 서정철, 남상수, 이재동, 최도영, 안병철, 박동석, 이윤호, 최용태. 대한침구학회지에 수재된 논문에 대한 분석고찰. 대한침구학회지. 1999 ; 16(1) : 125-46
  3. Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carroll D, Jenkinson C, Reynolds DJ, Gavaghan DJ et al. Assessing the quality of reports of randomised clinical trials : Is blinding necessary? Control Clin trials. 1996 ; 17 : 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1016/0197-2456(95)00134-4
  4. 이승덕. 대한침구학회지 논문의 통계적 오류에 관한 연구. 대한침구학회지. 2004 ; 21(1) : 176-88
  5. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Methods for development of NICE public health guidance. London : National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. 2006.
  6. Slim K, Nini E, Forestier D, Kqiatkowski F, Panis Y, Chipponi J. Methodological index for nonrandomised studies(minors-MINORS) : development and validation of a new instrument. ANZJ Surg. 2003 ; 73 : 712-6. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1445-2197.2003.02748.x
  7. Cowley DE. Prosthesis for primary total hip replacement : a critical appraisal of the literature. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 1995 ; 11 : 770-8. https://doi.org/10.1017/S026646230000920X
  8. Downs SH, Black N. The feasibility of creating a checklist for the assessment of the methodological quality both of randomised and non-randomised studies of health care interventions. J Epidemiol Community Health. 1998 ; 52 : 377-84. https://doi.org/10.1136/jech.52.6.377
  9. Wells GA, Shea B, O'Connell D, Peterson J, Welch V, Tugwell P. The-Newcastle-Ottawa Scale(NOS) for assessing the quality of non-randomised studies in meta-analyses. Ottawa : Clinical Epidemiology Unit. 1999.
  10. Reisch JS, Tyson JE, Mize SG. Aid to the evalution of therapeutic studies. Pediatrics. 1989 ; 84 : 815-27
  11. Thomas H. Quality assessment tool for quantitative studies. Effective public health practice project. Toronto : McMaster University. 2003.
  12. Zaza S, Wright-De Aguero LK, Briss PA, Truman BI, Hopkins DP, Hennessy MH et al. Data collection instrument and procedure for systematic reviews in the Guide to community Prevention Services : Task Force on Community Preventive Services. Am J Prev Med. 2000 ; 18(1) : 44-74. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0749-3797(99)00122-1