• Rev Assoc Med Bras (1992) · Jan 2023

    Criteria for selection and classification of studies in medical events.

    • René Aloisio da Costa Vieira, Regis Resende Paulinellli, Fábio Francisco Oliveira Rodrigues, MoreiraMarise Amaral RebouçasMAR0000-0002-5437-4994Universidade Federal de Goiás - Goiania (GO), Brazil., Ricardo Caponero, Eduardo Carvalho Pessoa, Rosemar Macedo Sousa Rahal, Gil Facina, and Ruffo de Freitas Junior.
    • Universidade Estadual Paulista "Júlio de Mesquita Filho", Faculdade de Medicina de Botucatu, Programa de Pós-Graduação em Tocoginecologia - Botucatu (SP), Brazil.
    • Rev Assoc Med Bras (1992). 2023 Jan 1; 69 (4): e20220888e20220888.

    ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of study methodology and evaluation type on the selection of studies during the presentation of scientific events.MethodsA prospective, observational, transversal approach was applied to a cohort of studies that were submitted for presentation at the 2021 Brazilian Breast Cancer Symposium. Three forms of criteria (CR) were presented. CR1 was based on six criteria (method, ethics, design, originality, promotion, and social contribution); CR2 graded the studies from 0 to 10 for each study, and CR3 was based on five criteria (presentation, method, originality, scientific knowledge, and social contribution). To evaluate the item correlation, Cronbach's alpha and factorial analysis were performed. For the evaluation of differences between the tests, we used the Kruskal-Wallis and post-hoc Dunn tests. To determine the differences in the study classifications, we used the Friedman test and Namenyi's all-pairs comparisons.ResultsA total of 122 studies were evaluated. There was also a good correlation with the items concerning criterion 1 (α=0.730) and 3 (α=0.937). Evaluating CR1 methodology, study design and social contribution (p=0.741) represents the main factor and CR3 methodology, and the scientific contribution (p=0.994) represents the main factor. The Kruskal-Wallis test showed differences in the results (p<0.001) for all the criteria that were used [CR1-CR2 (p<0.001), CR1-CR3 (p<0.001), and CR2-CR3 (p=0.004)]. The Friedman test showed differences in the ranking of the studies (p<0.001) for all studies (p<0.01).ConclusionMethodologies that use multiple criteria show good correlation and should be taken into account when ranking the best studies.

      Pubmed     Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…