جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه « ارزیابی نقادانه » در نشریات گروه « پزشکی »

The purpose of this research was to  write a critical review of the available service packages in the Mental and Social Health and Addiction Office (MSHAO) of the Ministry of Health and Medical Education in the areas of drugs, alcohol and tobacco, which are currently used in the primary health care system. The content analysis method was used to extract the specialists’ critiques.

Initially the MSHAO sent 1362 pages of information in the form of 47 files to researchers to be reviewed. The files were classified, eliminating/removing additional, unrelated and duplicated items; finally 840 pages in 29 files were studied and carefully examined. Then, seven experts in the field of addiction were asked to criticize the packages, using the content analysis method to extract the experts' critiques.

The findings showed that comprehensive information about drugs, alcohol and tobacco addiction is provided to the clients. However, based on a critical review of the existing packages four main critiques were extracted, namely, sources/references, epidemiology, incompatibility of Iranian-Islamic culture, and technical-specialist issues. In addition, criticisms were also extracted in the following areas/services: the number of files and the variety of interventions, editing and writing problems, interventions and discussions with inappropriate in-text sources/citations, some old sources/references (published in 2013 and 2014), old interventions, lack of appropriate compatibility with the culture of the Islamic society of Iran, and direct translation of some parts of the original texts and documents of international meetings/gatherings.

Despite the efforts of the Mental and Social Health and Addiction Office to cover the needs of the majority of people referring to the primary care system, it seems that the high number of interventions and additional information can cause confusion of/for the physician, mental health care provider, family health care provider, general health care provider and other relevant individuals. It is, therefore, suggested that some packages be merged with each other, duplicate items be removed and specific sections be added, some packages be fundamentally revised based on the suggested items, and updated packages be developed with due consideration of  to the culture of the Iranian society.

Combining research results with clinical practice has become a challenge. The critical appraisal helps make decisions. For this purpose, this study was performed aimed to critical evaluate the published clinical trials on "the effect of herbal medicine on striae gravidarum".

  In this critical review, the clinical trials articles published between 1972 and 2017 about the effect of herbal medicine on striae gravidarum were searched in the electronic scientific databases including Web of Science, PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Google Scholar and Persian articles in SID, Magiran, Goggle Scholar, using the keywords (Striae gravidarum OR Striae OR Stretch Marks) AND (Prevention OR Treatment OR Control) AND (Cream OR Gel OR Oil) and (Striae or pregnancy striae or pregnancy lines) and (prevention or treatment or control) and (Cream or gel or oil). The lasted edition of the CONSORT checklist (2018) was used. The scoring range was 0-45. The articles based on the scores were classified into three categories: poor, moderate and good. Data were analyzed by SPSS software (version 22) and descriptive statistics.

Out of the 14 articles reviewed, the overall compliance of the quality of the reviewed articles was estimated 46% with the Consort 2018 criteria. In general, the biggest shortcoming was in the participation of stakeholders and then the method of work. The overall mean score of the articles was 20.86±7.18 from a minimum and a maximum of 9-33.

The quality of the clinical trial reports on the effect of using herbal products on reducing pregnancy striae is not appropriate and desirable. Since the biggest shortcoming was in the method, it is recommended to solve these problems by using statistics and methodology experts and standard tools such as consort for self-evaluation of articles.

Randomize controlled trials (RCTs) are important in evidence-based medicine, and treatment decisions are made based on the results of these studies. Due to the frequency of this type of research on complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) and its effect on infertility, this study was performed with aim of critical appraisal of the effect of CAM on infertile women's pregnancy rate.

In this critical review, searching was made on electronic scientific databases including Scopus, PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, SID and Magiran without time limitation until November 2020 using the keywords of CAM and infertility. Inclusion criteria was Persian or English published RCTs related to the use of CAM in infertile women and exclusion criteria was lack of access to the full text of the article and non-compliance of the study method with the principles of RCTs. In the evaluation of the articles, the 2017 CONSORT checklist was used for non-pharmacological treatments. The scoring range was 0-44.

Out of the 25 articles reviewed, the overall quality compliance rate with the CONSORT checklist was estimated about 50%. The greatest weakness in reporting was observed in the title and abstract (0.88 ± 0. 726) and the discussion section (1.16 ± 0.898). The total mean score of the articles was 22.68 ± 6.176 with a minimum of 9 and a maximum of 33.

The appraised articles in the present study had an average quality. It is required that RCTs be conducted and reported in accordance with standard principles and be thoroughly reviewed critically with relevant checklists before publication. Training of researchers helps improving the quality of articles.

Clinical trial studies have a special value among a variety of studies. The results of these studies have important applications on human populations, including the study of the effects of drugs and therapies. Given the importance of such studies, it seems necessary to review the quality and evaluation of articles related to this field of research. The issue of critical appraisal has a very important place in biomedical studies; And help researchers evaluate the quality of articles. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical trial articles Medical Journal of Mashhad University of Medical Sciences during 1388-1398.

The present study was a descriptive cross-sectional study .In this study, the study population was 173 clinical trial articles that were selected from 741 articles published in the Journal of the Faculty of Medicine of Mashhad University of Medical Sciences during 1388 to the end of 1398. These articles were reviewed using consort checklists in 25 general items by two statistical experts with an agreement of more than 0.91%. Data were analyzed by SPSS software version 23.

In evaluating the articles in this journal, a growing trend was observed in the number of clinical trial articles published in the review. According to the evaluations based on the Consort Checklist, the lowest score assigned to articles was 6 points, which was related to an article in 1394, and the highest was an article in 1397, which received a score of 27 out of 37. The average score of all articles was 13.53 with a standard deviation of 2.82. The statistical methods used and the mention of the term "clinical trial" in the title were the items that received the most and the least amount of attention in the research, respectively.

In general, the attention of the studied clinical trial articles to the observance of the points of the consort statement has been less than acceptable, which eliminates the shortcomings and observes more of the consort items to increase the quality of the articles in Medical Journal of Mashhad University of Medical Sciences.

Randomized controlled clinical trial studies are the most valuable types of studies that their proper design and accurate reporting are of particular importance in medical science. This study was performed with aim to critically evaluate the randomized controlled clinical trial studies in the Iranian Journal of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Infertility.

In this cross-sectional analytic study, the clinical trial articles of the Iranian Journal of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Infertility between 2009 and 2019 were collected and scored based on the latest edition of the Consort Checklist (2010) by three biostatisticians that their training's adequacy was confirmed by measuring the kappa agreement coefficient. The articles were scored, and based on the scores, they were classified into five categories: very poor to excellent. Data were analyzed by SPSS software (version 25) and descriptive statistics.

Out of a total of 1318 articles published during 11 years, 325 were clinical trials, among them only 6 articles (1.85%) were rated as excellent. The lowest and highest scores among the reviewed articles were 14 and 28 (maximum score was 37). The mean and standard deviation of the scores obtained in all articles was calculated as 19.05± 0.34. However, less attention was paid to the two main issues of randomization and blindness in the clinical trials.

Due to the importance of clinical trial studies, it is necessary to pay attention to the articles' quality based on the consort checklist. It is also suggested that authors of such articles pay more attention to the two essential foundations of clinical studies, randomization and blindness, to increase the generalization of the results.

Given the importance of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) in the evidence-based approach in dentistry, the study aimed to conduct critical appraisal of dentistry RCTs of Iran published in English from 1999 until 2012.
In total, databases of PubMED, ISI web of science and Scopus were searched using specific keywords (i.e., dental, dentistry, critical appraisal, clinical trial, evidence-based RCT, randomized clinical trial, Iran). After the elimination of duplicate articles, the 433 remaining articles were assessed, which led to the selection of 86 studies by employing the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Following that, the articles were evaluated using the revised version of Jadad scale.
In this research, mean jadad score was 5.33±1.73, and articles were at a moderate level (4 According to the results of the study, the methodological quality of the Iranian English dentistry articles was generally at a medium level, which requires improvement. Emphasis on standard instructions in designing the studies and using review checklists during the complication of a research, along with holding educational relevant workshops, can considerably improve the quality of Iranian articles.

Randomized controlled trials are critical and important studies in medical sciences. Due to the vital role of such studies in production of valid scientific evidence in the promotion of maternal health, this study was performed with aim to assess the quality of clinical trials in relation to the efficacy of massage therapy on labor pain intensity published by Iranian authors using CONSORT criteria.
In this descriptive study, published Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) in relation to the efficacy of massage therapy on labor pain intensity were evaluated in Persian and English journals which are indexed in Google scholar, PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL as well as Persian databases such as SID, IranMedx, IRANDOC, and Magiran using the keywords of labor pain, massage, and randomized clinical trials from 1995 to 2017. Out of 155 articles, 20 RCTs were assessed using CONSORT, 2010 checklist. The minimum and maximum score of the checklist was zero and 37, respectively. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistical tests with SPSS software (version 14).
Based on the results of 20 selected articles about the effect of massage therapy on labor pain intensity, the overall accordance of the RCTs with CONSORT criteria was 54%. Totally, the highest defect was related to the section of methods and materials; in the items of this section, the highest defect was related to sample size, method used for randomized allocation and the method of blinding. The mean overall score of articles was 20.15±3.18 in the minimum and maximum range of 12-27. The highest percentage of reporting quality criteria was related to the methodology section, which was estimated to be 42%.
The most common weakness of authors in reporting the results of RCTs was seen in the section of materials and methods which could be improved by more training of these issues, use of statistics and methodology specialists and also using of standard tools for self-evaluation of the articles.

Aim. This study was conducted with the aim of evaluating qualitative articles on cardiovascular diseases published in Persian-language journals.
Background. Qualitative research contributes to the scientific literature of many disciplines by interpreting and producing theories related to social interactions and individual experiences in natural rather than experimental situations.
Method. In this cross-sectional study, databases including Magiran, SID, and Google Scholar were investigated to search for Persian articles on cardiovascular disease. The papers were selected using the keywords and according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria from among papers published between 2000 and 2017. The appraisal instrument comprised of a researcher-made checklist that was developed based on the content of the book, “Nursing Research Implementation, Critique and Application” written by Burns and Grove.
Findings. The 19 eligible articles included in the present study involved qualitative investigations on issues related to heart disease in various aspects. In terms of quality, 68 and 31 percent of the papers were evaluated as having moderate and good quality, respectively. In a more detailed assessment, the philosophical infrastructure criterion was given a lower score.
Conclusion. Overall, this study indicates that qualitative studies published in Persian language journals on cardiovascular disease have an appropriate quality. Because qualitative research can be well applied in nursing and since it stands as required knowledge for nurses, it seems that a more detailed review of manuscripts by journal editors using checklists and via specialized reviewers can enhance the quality of the published papers.

Given the considerable attention to research in recent years, review and elimination of errors in any research are of great importance. With respect to the scant review articles within the field of dentistry, especially randomized controlled clinical trials, this study aimed to collect and review these articles.
All randomized controlled clinical trials published in the Journal of Dental School, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran during 2003-2015 were collected and scored based on CONSORT checklist. Data analysis was performed in SPSS version 20. Central tendency and dispersion of the obtained scores were calculated. Accordingly, all articles were classified as weak, medium, good and excellent.
Among 514 collected articles, 64 were clinical trials, 40 of which were randomized controlled clinical trials. Most clinical trials (seven papers) were published during 2003-2009, whereas only one paper was published in 2012, 2005, 2004 and 2013. Mean and standard deviation of percentage of scores of all articles was 57.79±13.61. In addition, the highest mean score was obtained in 2014.
According to the results of this study, given the importance of randomized controlled clinical trials, it seems necessary to overcome the mentioned shortcomings and increase the quality of these studies.

Good quality is the main requirement of a research article to be used in the process of evidence-based care. Therefore, the present study was performed with aim to critically evaluate and analyze the published articles on Iranian women’s attitude towards menopause. In this critical appraisal, the databases including Science Direct, Scopus, PubMed, Google Scholar, as well as Persian databases of Magiran, and SID were searched from 1990to January 2015 using the keywords of “menopause”, “attitude”, “Iranian women”, and “Iran” or combinations of these words. 19 original articles which examined Iranian women’s attitude towards menopause were critically analyzed. CASP checklist was used to check the quality of the articles, and its items were categorized into four domains. Total quality of the articles was also divided into three categories of high, moderate and low. Among the articles, 10 articles (52.63%) had high quality, and 9 (47.36%) had moderate quality. The domain of participant's characteristics with 40% of the obtainable score, and study design with 86.31% of the obtainable score had the lowest and highest scores, respectively. The standardized questionnaires were used only in 2 articles (10.52%), and only 11 articles (57.89%) had mentioned the method of measuring the reliability and validity of the questionnaires. The quality of published articles on women’s attitude towards menopause was not satisfactory. It is recommended that authors and journal reviewers to follow the standard guidelines for scientific writing. Also, training courses is required to be held in order to familiarize the researchers with these guidelines.

One of the most important ways of scientific promotion of congresses is to evaluate abstract of articles and getting feedback from them. This study aimed to evaluate abstract of articles presented in the nursing and midwifery congresses during 2010-2015 from different aspects.
This is a descriptive/cross-sectional study which conducted on all abstracts presented in Nursing and Midwifery Congresses during 2010-2015. Data were studied through two tools including a standard tool of structural evaluation of abstracts for clinical trials, case study and review studies and also a checklist for conformity of abstracts with announced axis of each congress.
Among 812 abstracts examined in the study, 87% of them were clinical trials and the rest were case study and review articles. 98% of the abstracts of congresses held in the last two years were consistent with the guidelines. In 79 percent of the case study abstracts, the time of the study was unclear and in 82% of clinical trials, the number of missing samples was not mentioned. Limitations of the study and suggestions for further researches were not mentioned in 98% of the abstracts.
The findings of this study showed that although structure of abstracts in Nursing and Midwifery congresses in recent years is closed to the standard structure, there is still lot of problems regarding the scientific writing of abstracts which required further attention of authorities of Nursing and Midwifery Congresses to the standard and international structure of scientific writing of abstracts.

In recent years, importance and researcher's enthusiasm of evidence-based studies has increased; thus, a survey and verification of previous studies is needed. In spite of the importance of descriptive epidemiological studies, a few critical appraisals and verifications have been done. To address this necessity, this paper aimed to survey and critically appraises dental epidemiological studies. Dental descriptive epidemiological studies in Iran published between 1996 and 2009 were selected and scored based on standard instruction consisted of eight criteria as following: 1) Sampling method, 2) Sampling frame, 3) Sample size, 4) Appropriate Measurement, 5) Unbiased measurement, 6) Response rate, 7) Confidence intervals, 8) Study subjects description. Among 91 papers, the maximum score was related to "Study subject’s description" that 72 papers obtained it. In contrary, the minimum score was related to "Response rate" which only 2 papers obtained it. Surprisingly, the average total score of the 91 papers was only 2.64 out of 8. In these studies, the common mistakes were non-random sampling, unidentified sampling frame, and vague method of sample size computation. In spite of correct measurement criteria, most of the studies had not described them clearly. To conduct epidemiological studies which provide a clear and documented description of a real situation, improving the quality of the papers seems necessary. Considering the neglected criteria and correction of common mistakes are essential; Consequently, the future studies may present correct, trustworthy, and clear status of the problems.