CAJ | 학술논문

目的：运用卫生经济学研究质量评价（ QHES）量表评价我国肿瘤领域药物经济学研究的方法学质量。方法：计算机检索中国学术期刊网络出版总库（CNKI）、中文科技期刊全文数据库（VIP）、中国生物医学文献数据库（CBM）和万方期刊数据库（ WANFANG），收集肿瘤领域经济学研究，并采用QHES量表对其质量进行评价，利用Meta Analyst 3.13和RevMan 5.0软件对评价结果进行统计分析。结果：最终纳入43篇文献研究，自2003年后发表研究数量逐年增加，医院独立完成的研究占90.7％，60.5％的研究采用成本效果分析方法，14篇研究发表的期刊被中国科学引文数据库（ chinese science citation database，CSCD）收录。纳入研究总得分为62.51±5.92，方法学质量评分结果为一般。分层分析显示，在发表时间、作者单位性质和期刊来源方面的差异均无统计学意义（ P＞0.05）。结论：我国肿瘤药物经济学研究方法学质量整体较低，突出表现在研究分析角度、亚组人群、成本测算方法和资金资助等的报告上，建议未来研究应尽可能遵守QHES量表报告方法学部分。
목적：운용위생경제학연구질량평개（ QHES）량표평개아국종류영역약물경제학연구적방법학질량。방법：계산궤검색중국학술기간망락출판총고（CNKI）、중문과기기간전문수거고（VIP）、중국생물의학문헌수거고（CBM）화만방기간수거고（ WANFANG），수집종류영역경제학연구，병채용QHES량표대기질량진행평개，이용Meta Analyst 3.13화RevMan 5.0연건대평개결과진행통계분석。결과：최종납입43편문헌연구，자2003년후발표연구수량축년증가，의원독립완성적연구점90.7％，60.5％적연구채용성본효과분석방법，14편연구발표적기간피중국과학인문수거고（ chinese science citation database，CSCD）수록。납입연구총득분위62.51±5.92，방법학질량평분결과위일반。분층분석현시，재발표시간、작자단위성질화기간래원방면적차이균무통계학의의（ P＞0.05）。결론：아국종류약물경제학연구방법학질량정체교저，돌출표현재연구분석각도、아조인군、성본측산방법화자금자조등적보고상，건의미래연구응진가능준수QHES량표보고방법학부분。
Objective: To assess the quality of economics research of cancer in China by the quality of health economic studies ( QHES) checklist.Methods: We have searched China Academic Journal Network Publishing Database, China Science and Tenology Journal Database,China Biomedical Literature Database and China Online Journals and included the related economical studies of cancer.At the same time, the qualities of included studies were assessed by the QHES, the Meta Analyst 3.13 and RevMan 5.0 was used to a-nalysis the related data.Results:43 studies were identified and analyzed, published papers were increased from 2003.90.7%studies were performed by doctor in hospital, cost effectiveness analysis were used in 60.5% studies,14 studies were published in chinese sci-ence citation database.The total score of included studies was 62.51 ±5.92,the quality was moderate, the subgroup analysis showed that there were no significant difference in publish time and level of journal and institutions ( P>0.05 ).Conclusion: The methodological quality of cancer overall is low, especially in the study angle, the subgroup, cost calculation and funding, we recommend that editor could add the QHES checklists to the guide for authors.