Criteria for selection and classification of studies in medical events

Página do item simplificado
dc.contributor.authorda Costa Vieira, René Aloisio [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorPaulinellli, Regis Resende
dc.contributor.authorRodrigues, Fábio Francisco Oliveira
dc.contributor.authorMoreira, Marise Amaral Rebouças
dc.contributor.authorCaponero, Ricardo
dc.contributor.authorPessoa, Eduardo Carvalho [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorRahal, Rosemar Macedo Sousa
dc.contributor.authorFacina, Gil
dc.contributor.authorde Freitas Junior, Ruffo
dc.contributor.institutionUniversidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)
dc.contributor.institutionUniversidade Federal de Goiás (UFG)
dc.contributor.institutionInstituto do Câncer Dr. Arnaldo Vieira de Carvalho
dc.contributor.institutionHospital Alemão Oswaldo Cruz
dc.contributor.institutionUniversidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)
dc.date.accessioned2023-07-29T13:51:53Z
dc.date.available2023-07-29T13:51:53Z
dc.date.issued2023-01-01
dc.description.abstractOBJECTIVE: The 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. METHODS: A 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. RESULTS: A 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). CONCLUSION: Methodologies that use multiple criteria show good correlation and should be taken into account when ranking the best studies.en
dc.description.affiliationUniversidade Estadual Paulista “Júlio de Mesquita Filho” Faculdade de Medicina de Botucatu Programa de Pós-Graduação em Tocoginecologia, SP
dc.description.affiliationUniversidade Federal de Goiás, GO
dc.description.affiliationInstituto do Câncer Dr. Arnaldo Vieira de Carvalho, SP
dc.description.affiliationHospital Alemão Oswaldo Cruz, SP
dc.description.affiliationUniversidade Federal de São Paulo, SP
dc.description.affiliationUnespUniversidade Estadual Paulista “Júlio de Mesquita Filho” Faculdade de Medicina de Botucatu Programa de Pós-Graduação em Tocoginecologia, SP
dc.identifierhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1806-9282.20220888
dc.identifier.citationRevista da Associacao Medica Brasileira, v. 69, n. 4, 2023.
dc.identifier.doi10.1590/1806-9282.20220888
dc.identifier.issn1806-9282
dc.identifier.issn0104-4230
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85152977636
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11449/248721
dc.language.isoeng
dc.relation.ispartofRevista da Associacao Medica Brasileira
dc.sourceScopus
dc.subjectCongress
dc.subjectMeeting abstract
dc.subjectMethods
dc.subjectPlanning techniques
dc.subjectSocieties, scientific
dc.titleCriteria for selection and classification of studies in medical eventsen
dc.typeArtigo

Arquivos

Coleções

Artigos - Ginecologia e Obstetrícia - FMB