• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of endovascular therapy: an official journal of the International Society of Endovascular Specialists >Which do you like better...a bowl of cheerios or a big mac? Pros and cons of meta-analyses in endovascular research
【24h】

Which do you like better...a bowl of cheerios or a big mac? Pros and cons of meta-analyses in endovascular research

机译：您更喜欢哪个...一碗麦片粥或一碗巨无霸？荟萃分析在血管内研究中的利与弊

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

If you had a medical time machine, you might enjoy, just for fun, a 30-year backward ride in cardiovascular practice. You would find yourself trapped without computers, no evidence-based medicine, the absence of PubMed, and many other missing boons. How were you supposed to make informed clinical decisions at that time?1 Few (if any) randomized trials were available, and the occasional one of acceptable quality would emerge from the gray literature only if published in a journal to which you had access through a subscription or friends. Accordingly, instead of clinical evidence, the main factors shaping your practice at that time were limited to experience and informed opinion, both highly difficult to appraise and constructively criticize.
机译：如果您有医疗时光机，您可能会只是为了娱乐而享受30年的心血管练习。您会发现自己被困在没有计算机，没有循证医学，没有PubMed的情况下，还缺少许多其他好处。您当时应该如何做出明智的临床决策？1很少有（如果有的话）随机试验可用，并且只有在您通过以下方式访问的期刊上发表论文时，灰色文献才会偶尔出现可接受的质量的研究。订阅或朋友。因此，代替临床证据的是，当时影响您的实践的主要因素仅限于经验和知情的意见，既难以评估也难以进行建设性的批评。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号