中国卫生标准管理
中國衛生標準管理
중국위생표준관리
CHINA HEALTH STANDARD MANAGEMENT
2015年
15期
149-149,150
,共2页
中医药%IgA肾病%试验文献
中醫藥%IgA腎病%試驗文獻
중의약%IgA신병%시험문헌
Traditional Chinese medicine%IgA nephropathy%Trials
目的:探讨中医药治疗IgA肾病临床随机对照试验文献的方法及评价。方法选取2004年到2014年我国生物医学期刊发表的与中医药治疗IgA肾病临床随机对照试验文献90篇。结果90篇中医药治疗IgA肾病临床随机对照试验文献中,单列诊断标准项22篇(24.44%),文献没有明确诊断标准31篇(34.44%),明确文献纳入标准13(14.44%),明确排除标准14篇(15.56%)等等,各类型对比具有统计学意义, P <0.05。结论临床上在治疗IgA肾病时必须选用大量实验文献,实验文献的使用面临着临床随机对照实验设计不严密、盲目使用率偏低、病例退出和失访报道不够中医症候分类不规范等问题。
目的:探討中醫藥治療IgA腎病臨床隨機對照試驗文獻的方法及評價。方法選取2004年到2014年我國生物醫學期刊髮錶的與中醫藥治療IgA腎病臨床隨機對照試驗文獻90篇。結果90篇中醫藥治療IgA腎病臨床隨機對照試驗文獻中,單列診斷標準項22篇(24.44%),文獻沒有明確診斷標準31篇(34.44%),明確文獻納入標準13(14.44%),明確排除標準14篇(15.56%)等等,各類型對比具有統計學意義, P <0.05。結論臨床上在治療IgA腎病時必鬚選用大量實驗文獻,實驗文獻的使用麵臨著臨床隨機對照實驗設計不嚴密、盲目使用率偏低、病例退齣和失訪報道不夠中醫癥候分類不規範等問題。
목적:탐토중의약치료IgA신병림상수궤대조시험문헌적방법급평개。방법선취2004년도2014년아국생물의학기간발표적여중의약치료IgA신병림상수궤대조시험문헌90편。결과90편중의약치료IgA신병림상수궤대조시험문헌중,단렬진단표준항22편(24.44%),문헌몰유명학진단표준31편(34.44%),명학문헌납입표준13(14.44%),명학배제표준14편(15.56%)등등,각류형대비구유통계학의의, P <0.05。결론림상상재치료IgA신병시필수선용대량실험문헌,실험문헌적사용면림착림상수궤대조실험설계불엄밀、맹목사용솔편저、병례퇴출화실방보도불구중의증후분류불규범등문제。
Objective To explore the method of traditional Chinese medicine in the treatment of IgA nephropathy clinical randomized controled trials and evaluation.Methods From 2004 to 2014, Chinese biomedical journals published in the literature of traditional Chinese medicine and the treatment of IgA nephropathy clinical randomized controled trial of 90.Results 90 pieces of traditional Chinese medicine in treating IgA nephropathy clinical randomized controled trials, single diagnostic criteria 22 articles (24.44%), literature is not clear diagnostic criteria 31 articles (34.44%), clear the inclusion criteria, 13 (14.44%) clear exclusion criteria 14 articles (15.56%), with statistical significance of various types of comparison,P < 0.05. Conclusion In the clinical treatment of IgA nephropathy should be chosen in a large number of experimental literature, the literature is faced with the problem of clinical randomized controled experimental design is not tight, the blind use of low rate, exit and lost report cases of TCM syndrome classification standard is not enough.