中国科技期刊研究 ›› 2023, Vol. 34 ›› Issue (2): 144-155. doi: 10.11946/cjstp.202206290499

• 质量建设 • 上一篇    下一篇

医学临床研究论文质量评价指标体系构建

栾嘉1)()(), 邓强庭1), 李玥2), 张艺霖1), 李洁3), 孙菲4), 李娜5), 陈汐敏6), 谢文鸿7), 杜亮8),*()()   

  1. 1) 《陆军军医大学学报》编辑部,重庆市沙坪坝区高滩岩正街30号 400038
    2) 陆军军医大学研究生院,重庆市沙坪坝区高滩岩正街30号 400038
    3) 《中国医学科学杂志(英文版)》编辑部,北京市东城区东单三条9号 100005
    4) 《解放军医学院学报》编辑部,北京市海淀区复兴路28号 100853
    5) 《协和医学杂志》编辑部,北京市东城区王府井帅府园1号 100730
    6) 南京医科大学学报编辑部,江苏省南京市江宁区龙眠大道101号 211166
    7) 南方医科大学南方医院《护理学报》编辑部,广东省广州市白云区广州大道北1838号 510515
    8) 四川大学华西医院华西医学期刊出版社,四川省成都市武侯区国学巷37号 610041
  • 收稿日期:2022-06-29 修回日期:2022-10-23 出版日期:2023-02-15 发布日期:2023-03-20
  • 通讯作者:
    *杜 亮(ORCID:0000-0003-1855-9139),博士,教授,E-mail:
  • 作者简介:

    栾 嘉(ORCID:0000-0002-6258-5046),博士,副编审,E-mail:;

    邓强庭,博士研究生,副编审;
    李 玥,硕士研究生;
    张艺霖,硕士,助理编辑;
    李 洁,博士,副教授;
    孙 菲,博士,副教授;
    李 娜,硕士,编辑部主任;
    陈汐敏,博士,编审;
    谢文鸿,硕士,副编审。
    作者贡献声明: 栾 嘉:实施研究,撰写论文; 邓强庭:实施研究,处理数据,修改论文; 李 玥:整理文献、数据; 张艺霖,李 洁,孙 菲,李 娜,陈汐敏,谢文鸿:采集数据,修改论文; 杜 亮:把握研究方向,确定研究思路,修改论文,定稿。
  • 基金资助:
    2022年中国科学技术信息研究所ISTIC-Taylor & Francis Group学术前沿观察联合实验室开放基金“基于内容主导的我国医学期刊开放同行评议模式的研究”; 重庆市高校期刊研究会“渝编·仁和基金”重点项目“医学期刊临床研究论文质量评价体系的构建”(CQZD2020-1)

Establishment of quality evaluation index system for clinical medical research papers

LUAN Jia1)()(), DENG Qiangting1), LI Yue2), ZHANG Yilin1), LI Jie3), SUN Fei4), LI Na5), CHEN Ximin6), XIE Wenhong7), DU Liang8)()()   

  1. 1) Editorial Office of Journal of Army Medical University, 30 Gaotanyan Street, Shapingba District, Chongqing 400038, China
    2) Graduate School, Army Medical University, 30 Gaotanyan Street, Shapingba District, Chongqing 400038, China
    3) Editorial Office of Chinese Medical Sciences Journal (English Version), 9 Dongdan Santiao, Dongcheng District, Beijing 100005, China
    4) Editorial Office of Academic Journal of Chinese PLA Medical School, 28 Fuxing Road, Haidian District, Beijing 100853, China
    5) Editorial Office of Medical Journal of Peking Union Medical College Hospital, 1 Shuaifuyuan, Wangfujing, Dongcheng District, Beijing 100730, China
    6) Editorial Department of Journal of Nanjing Medical University, 101 Longmian Avenue, Jiangning District, Nanjing 211166, China
    7) Editorial Office of Journal of Nursing, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, 1838 North Guangzhou Avenue, Baiyun District, Guangzhou 510515, China
    8) West China Medical Publishers, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, 37 Guoxue Xiang, Wuhou District, Chengdu 610041, China
  • Received:2022-06-29 Revised:2022-10-23 Online:2023-02-15 Published:2023-03-20

摘要:

【目的】 构建医学临床研究论文质量评价指标体系,为医学期刊编辑部/审稿人提供详细的审稿标准以控制我国医学期刊的整体学术质量。【方法】 采用文献研究、专家访谈、实证研究和小组讨论等方法,募集、筛选医学临床研究论文质量评价指标,并根据结构维度归类。【结果】 初步构建出医学临床研究论文质量评价指标体系,该指标体系包含具备伦理委员会审查同意批件、试验性研究受试者须签署知情同意书、具备伦理审查申报书、利益冲突声明、研究真实、报告真实、与临床实践的相关性、被二次研究及转化研究等证据(文献)引用、临床研究注册、报告规范、研究设计方案正确、方法学质量、偏倚风险评估、统计学信息完备且统计结果解读正确、基于学科领域的科学问题创新、证据质量等级的提升、方法学创新17项具体评价指标,分为伦理、真实性、实用性、透明性、科学性、创新性6个维度。对每一项评价指标进行术语定义与解读,解释评价方法并明确评审责任人。【结论】 “真实地接近真值”是临床研究论文质量评价的核心。为有效控制我国医学期刊的整体学术质量,应大力推行标准化审稿、提升医学科学编辑的专业能力、建立并运行医学科学编辑资质认证机制。

关键词: 临床研究, 医学期刊, 同行评议, 学术质量, 指标体系

Abstract:

[Purposes] This paper aims to provide medical journal editorial offices/reviewers with detailed review criteria to control the overall academic quality of Chinese medical journals by establishing a quality evaluation index system for clinical medical research papers. [Methods] Literature research, expert interview, empirical study, group discussion, and other research methods were used to collect and screen out the quality evaluation indexes of clinical medical research papers. Indexes were categorized according to structural dimensions. [Findings] A quality evaluation index system for clinical medical research papers is preliminarily established, including 17 indexes, namely, ethics committee review and consent approval document, the subject's informed consent signature, the ethics review declaration, the conflict of interest statement, the authenticity of the research, the authenticity of report, the correlation with clinical practice, citation of evidence (literature) such as secondary research and transformation research, registration of clinical studies, reporting standards, correct research design, methodological quality, risk of bias assessment, complete statistical information and correct interpretation of statistical results, innovation of scientific issues based on subject areas, improvement of evidence quality levels, and methodological innovations. The system is divided into 6 dimensions (ethics, authenticity, practicality, transparency, scientificity, and innovation). Each evaluation index is defined and interpreted, the evaluation method is explained, and the person responsible for the review is clarified. [Conclusions] "Approaching the truth value with proper authentic method" is the core of academic quality evaluation of clinical medical research papers. To effectively control the overall academic quality of medical journals in China, we should promote standardized review process vigorously, improve the professional competence of medical science editors, and establish a certification mechanism for medical science editors.

Key words: Clinical research, Medical journal, Peer review, Academic quality, Evaluation index system