期刊文献+

循证医学时代的中西医结合诊疗模式 被引量:6

Evidence-Based Clinical Model of Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine
暂未订购
导出
摘要 循证医学时代对中西医结合的理念、模式、方法提出了新的要求,强调干预措施疗效的客观评价,中西医相结合的模式从两者的互补最终朝向跨学科、以病人为中心、以调动病人自愈能力的整体医疗模式方向发展。中国循证医学的研究领域包括循证医学教育、系统评价、随机对照临床试验文献质量评价等。大多数中西医结合医疗干预措施需要进行科学的评价,针对中西医治疗手段需要有关疗效、安全性、成本-效果的高质量证据,实现证据的全球化和决策的本土化。真正的中西医结合医学最终将创造一种全新的医学示范,体现安全、有效、可支付、可获得的医疗服务。 Evidence-based medicine(EBM) puts new demands on concept,medical pattern and method of integrated traditional Chinese and Western medicine,and emphasizes that the intervention effects should be evaluated objectively.Combination style for traditional Chinese and Western medicine has been changed from complementing each other to the whole medical system of interdisciplinary study,patient-centeredness,and self-healing ability of the patients.The study fields of EBM in China include EBM education,systematic review,and critical evaluation of randomized controlled trial(RCT),etc.The majority of health care interventions in integrated traditional Chinese and Western medicine should be evaluated scientifically from the views of the effects and methodological quality of RCT.There is a need for high quality evidence on effects,safety and cost-effectiveness of the integrative treatment for globalizing the evidence and localizing the decisions.The real integrated traditional Chinese and Western medicine will create a new medical style example for implementing safe,effective,affordable,and accessible health care services.
作者 张晶 刘建平
出处 《循证医学》 CSCD 2010年第5期290-293,共4页 The Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine
关键词 循证医学 中西医结合 诊断 治疗 evidence-based medicine integrated traditional Chinese and Western medicine diagnosis treatment
  • 相关文献

参考文献9

二级参考文献30

  • 1刘建平.临床试验效应的表达——指标及其意义[J].中国中西医结合杂志,2004,24(8):677-679. 被引量:26
  • 2詹思廷.中医药学术期刊随机对照临床试验文章评阅及建议[J].中国中西医结合杂志,1999,19(9):568-568.
  • 3Liu JP, Kjaergard LL, Gluud C. Misuse of randomization: a review of Chinese randomized trials of herbal medicines for chronic hepatitis B. Am J Chin Med,2002, 30(I): 173-176.
  • 4Schulz KF, Chalmers I, Hayes RJ, et al. Empirical evidence of bias:Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials. JAMA, 1995, 273(5): 408 412.
  • 5Jadad A. Randomized controlled trials. London: BMJ Publishing Group, 1998. 1-9.
  • 6World Medical Association. Declaration of Helsinki:ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. JAMA, 2000, 284(23): 3043-3045.
  • 7Juni P, Altman DG, Egger M. Systematic reviews in health care: Assessing the quality of controlled clinical trials. BMJ, 2001, 323(7303):42-46.
  • 8[1]Begg C, Cho M, Eastwood S, et al. Improving the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials. The CONSORT statement[J]. JAMA, 1996, 276(8):637-639.
  • 9[2]Moher D, Schulz KF, Altman DG. The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomised trials[J]. Lancet, 2001, 357(9263):1191-1194.
  • 10[3]MacPherson H, White A, Cummings M, et al. Standards for reporting interventions in controlled trials of acupuncture: the STRICTA recommendations[J]. Complement Ther Med, 2001, 9(4):246-249.

共引文献127

同被引文献89

引证文献6

二级引证文献27

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部