Qualidade do relato dos procedimentos metodológicos em periódicos nacionais na área de administração de empresas: o caso da modelagem em equações estruturais nos periódicos nacionais entre 2001 e 2010

Esta pesquisa teve o objetivo de avaliar a qualidade da descrição dos procedimentos metodológicos de artigos que utilizaram a modelagem em equações estruturais (MEE), incluindo a análise fatorial confirmatória e a path analysis, e que foram publicados na RAE, RAUSP, REAd, O&S, RAC e RAE-eletrônica entre 2001 e 2010. A partir da revisão da literatura metodológica, foi elaborado um check list para avaliar as treze etapas da MEE, sendo validado com 33 especialistas. Os principais resultados da análise de 68 artigos encontrados foram: a impossibilidade de replicar os estudos devido à falta de informações e o uso de estratégias exploratórias sem a posterior validação. Por outro lado, a justificativa do método utilizado e a explicação das implicações teóricas dos resultados são aspectos que têm sido atendidos plenamente. O check list foi um importante subproduto desta pesquisa, pois, a partir dele, são propostas novas linhas de investigação e até mesmo seu uso como ferramenta didática.

Quantifizierung von Steinschlagrisiken an Straßen

Thema: Quantifizierung von Steinschlagrisiken an Straßen Die Einschätzung eines bestehenden Steinschlagrisikos an Verkehrswegen ist in Gebirgs- und Mittelgebirgsregionen seit jeher eine Aufgabe, die mit verschiedensten Methoden und unterschiedlichem Aufwand bearbeitet wird. In der vorliegenden Untersuchung werden die maßgebenden Parameter zur Beschreibung einer Böschung aufgenommen und bewertet. Es wurde ein Arbeitsblatt entwickelt, in dem festgelegte Parameter erfasst werden, die teils mit Ankreuztechnik, teils mit der Eingabe von Daten, im Computer notiert werden. Das Arbeitsblatt umfasst vier Themenbereiche: Allgemeine Daten, Angaben zur Geometrie der Böschung, Angaben zum Verkehr und Angaben zum Gestein und Gebirge. Ein Computerprogramm, das auf der Basis der Software Excel von Microsoft erstellt wurde, vergibt nach der Dateneingabe Bewertungspunkte (1. Bewertungsschritt). Es werden Summen gebildet und die Teilbereiche bewertet (2. Bewertungsschritt). Jeder Teilbereich besitzt drei Bewertungsklassen. Die Verknüpfung der Bewertung der Teilbereiche Geometrische Angaben und Angaben zum Gestein und Gebirge stellt die eigentliche Risikoeinschätzung dar (3. Bewertungsschritt). Es gibt drei Einstufungen zur Beschreibung des Risikos: ð Der Verkehr ist durch Steinschlag sehr gering gefährdet. ð Der Verkehr ist durch Steinschlag gering gefährdet. Eine Detailüberprüfung muss erfolgen, da eine Gefährdung nicht auszuschließen ist. ð Der Verkehr ist gefährdet. Es besteht ein hohes Steinschlagrisiko. Bewertungen und Hinweise zu den Teilbereichen Allgemeine Daten und Angaben zum Verkehr kann der Anwender nach eigenem Ermessen zusätzlich nutzen. Die abschließende Risikoeinschätzung erfolgt durch den Anwender bzw. einen Sachverständigen.

Stato della salute orale in pazienti istituzionalizzati affetti da patologie neuropsichiatriche

Le patologie di pertinenza odontostomatologica in pazienti adulti istituzionalizzati affetti da disabilità neuropsichiatrica presentano un’alta prevalenza; scopo del presente lavoro è stato la valutazione della prevalenza di carie (DMFT, SIC) e lo stato di igiene orale (OHI-S) in un gruppo di 103 (72 maschi, 31 femmine, età media 51) pazienti degli Istituti del P.O. Corberi e della RSD Beato Papa Giovanni XIII di Limbiate (MB). E’ stato valutata la collaborazione alla visita con la scala di Frankl, si è definito lo stato funzionale del paziente, in base alla Classificazione Internazionale del Funzionamento, della Disabilità e della Salute (ICF) e si è valutata con un questionario la motivazione degli operatori sanitari a stili di salute orale. Lo studio ha evidenziato un DMFT medio pari a 16,14 e SIC pari a 23,8, valori non correlabili con l'età del soggetto. L’OHI-S medio è pari a 3,46, dato che si presenza correlato con il tempo intercorso dall’ultima visita odontoiatrica. Dal confronto con un gruppo di soggetti sani della stessa età risultano significativamente più elevati i valori della componente (M) e (F) del DMFT e di tutte le componenti dell’OHI-S. Il campione è stato diviso in due gruppi a seconda della loro pregressa collaborazione al trattamento odontoiatrico e sono stati confrontati i dati ricavati dalla checklist ICF. Il gruppo collaborante ha mostrato livelli di funzionalità superiori per quanto riguarda le capacità di osservare, parlare e l’assistenza personale. Dalle risposte del personale socio-sanitario ermerge scarsa informazione sulle tecniche di igiene orale domiciliare quotidiana del paziente assistito. I risultati di questo studio confermano l'alta prevalenza di carie e scarsa igiene orale in soggetti istituzionalizzati con disabilità neuropsichiatrica. L'ICF si è dimostrata una utile guida per la valutazione dell�approccio comportamentale più idoneo in fase di trattamento. Infine, si evidenzia l’importanza di una formazione continua degli operatori socio-sanitari.

Fattori eziologici della Sindrome del Tunnel Carpale: una revisione sistematica con meta-analisi degli studi analitici

OBIETTIVO: sintetizzare le evidenze disponibili sulla relazione tra i fattori di rischio (personali e lavorativi) e l’insorgenza della Sindrome del Tunnel Carpale (STC). METODI: è stata condotta una revisione sistematica della letteratura su database elettronici considerando gli studi caso-controllo e di coorte. Abbiamo valutato la qualità del reporting degli studi con la checklist STROBE. Le stime studio-specifiche sono state espresse come OR (IC95%) e combinate con una meta-analisi condotta con un modello a effetti casuali. La presenza di eventuali bias di pubblicazione è stata valutata osservando l’asimmetria del funnel plot e con il test di Egger. RISULTATI: Sono stati selezionati 29 studi di cui 19 inseriti nella meta-analisi: 13 studi caso-controllo e 6 di coorte. La meta-analisi ha mostrato un aumento significativo di casi di STC tra i soggetti obesi sia negli studi caso-controllo [OR 2,4 (1,9-3,1); I(2)=70,7%] che in quelli di coorte [OR 2,0 (1,6-2,7); I(2)=0%]. L'eterogeneità totale era significativa (I(2)=59,6%). Risultati simili si sono ottenuti per i diabetici e soggetti affetti da malattie della tiroide. L’esposizione al fumo non era associata alla STC sia negli studi caso-controllo [OR 0,7 (0,4-1,1); I(2)=83,2%] che di coorte [OR 0,8 (0,6-1,2); I(2)=45,8%]. A causa delle molteplici modalità di valutazione non è stato possibile calcolare una stima combinata delle esposizioni professionali con tecniche meta-analitiche. Dalla revisione, è risultato che STC è associata con: esposizione a vibrazioni, movimenti ripetitivi e posture incongrue di mano-polso. CONCLUSIONI: I risultati della revisione sistematica confermano le evidenze dell'esistenza di un'associazione tra fattori di rischio personali e STC. Nonostante la diversa qualità dei dati sull'esposizione e le differenze degli effetti dei disegni di studio, i nostri risultati indicano elementi di prova sufficienti di un legame tra fattori di rischio professionali e STC. La misurazione dell'esposizione soprattutto per i fattori di rischio professionali, è un obiettivo necessario per studi futuri.

Characterization of functioning in multiple sclerosis using the ICF

The objective of this study was to explore whether it is possible to describe based on the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) relevant aspects of functioning and disability affected in multiple sclerosis (MS) as well as environmental factors relevant to persons with MS. The specific aim was to identify most relevant 'Body functions', 'Body structures', 'Activities and participation', as well as 'Environmental factors' in patients with MS using the ICF. Additionally, different MS forms were compared with respect to the identified problems. A multi-centre study was conducted in an empirical cross-sectional design. Data from 205 individuals with MS were collected in rehabilitation centres: disease related data, socio-demographic data, single interviews based on the Extended ICF Checklist and a patient questionnaire including ratings on general health and functioning status, Beck Depression Inventory II (BDI-II) and Comorbidity Questionnaire (SCQ). The 129 ICF categories identified represent a comprehensive classification of functioning in MS from the clinical perspective. Differences between MS forms were observed for several ICF categories, EDSS, general health and functioning status, but not for BDI and SCQ. The study showed that it is possible to describe based on the ICF the spectrum in functioning and disability affected in MS as well as environmental factors relevant to persons with MS.

[CONSORT 2010 Explanation and Elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials (Chinese version)]

Overwhelming evidence shows the quality of reporting of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) is not optimal. Without transparent reporting, readers cannot judge the reliability and validity of trial findings nor extract information for systematic reviews. Recent methodological analyses indicate that inadequate reporting and design are associated with biased estimates of treatment effects. Such systematic error is seriously damaging to RCTs, which are considered the gold standard for evaluating interventions because of their ability to minimise or avoid bias. A group of scientists and editors developed the CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) statement to improve the quality of reporting of RCTs. It was first published in 1996 and updated in 2001. The statement consists of a checklist and flow diagram that authors can use for reporting an RCT. Many leading medical journals and major international editorial groups have endorsed the CONSORT statement. The statement facilitates critical appraisal and interpretation of RCTs. During the 2001 CONSORT revision, it became clear that explanation and elaboration of the principles underlying the CONSORT statement would help investigators and others to write or appraise trial reports. A CONSORT explanation and elaboration article was published in 2001 alongside the 2001 version of the CONSORT statement. After an expert meeting in January 2007, the CONSORT statement has been further revised and is published as the CONSORT 2010 Statement. This update improves the wording and clarity of the previous checklist and incorporates recommendations related to topics that have only recently received recognition, such as selective outcome reporting bias. This explanatory and elaboration document-intended to enhance the use, understanding, and dissemination of the CONSORT statement-has also been extensively revised. It presents the meaning and rationale for each new and updated checklist item providing examples of good reporting and, where possible, references to relevant empirical studies. Several examples of flow diagrams are included. The CONSORT 2010 Statement, this revised explanatory and elaboration document, and the associated website (www.consort-statement.org) should be helpful resources to improve reporting of randomised trials.

CONSORT 2010 Explanation and Elaboration: Updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials

Overwhelming evidence shows the quality of reporting of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) is not optimal. Without transparent reporting, readers cannot judge the reliability and validity of trial findings nor extract information for systematic reviews. Recent methodological analyses indicate that inadequate reporting and design are associated with biased estimates of treatment effects. Such systematic error is seriously damaging to RCTs, which are considered the gold standard for evaluating interventions because of their ability to minimise or avoid bias. A group of scientists and editors developed the CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) statement to improve the quality of reporting of RCTs. It was first published in 1996 and updated in 2001. The statement consists of a checklist and flow diagram that authors can use for reporting an RCT. Many leading medical journals and major international editorial groups have endorsed the CONSORT statement. The statement facilitates critical appraisal and interpretation of RCTs. During the 2001 CONSORT revision, it became clear that explanation and elaboration of the principles underlying the CONSORT statement would help investigators and others to write or appraise trial reports. A CONSORT explanation and elaboration article was published in 2001 alongside the 2001 version of the CONSORT statement. After an expert meeting in January 2007, the CONSORT statement has been further revised and is published as the CONSORT 2010 Statement. This update improves the wording and clarity of the previous checklist and incorporates recommendations related to topics that have only recently received recognition, such as selective outcome reporting bias. This explanatory and elaboration document-intended to enhance the use, understanding, and dissemination of the CONSORT statement-has also been extensively revised. It presents the meaning and rationale for each new and updated checklist item providing examples of good reporting and, where possible, references to relevant empirical studies. Several examples of flow diagrams are included. The CONSORT 2010 Statement, this revised explanatory and elaboration document, and the associated website (www.consort-statement.org) should be helpful resources to improve reporting of randomised trials.

Repetitive behaviours in patients with Gilles de la Tourette syndrome: tics, compulsions, or both?

Background Repetitive behaviours (RB) in patients with Gilles de la Tourette syndrome (GTS) are frequent. However, a controversy persists whether they are manifestations of obssessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) or correspond to complex tics. Methods 166 consecutive patients with GTS aged 15–68 years were recruited and submitted to extensive neurological, psychiatric and psychological evaluations. RB were evaluated by the YBOCS symptom checklist and Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (M.I.N.I), and classified on the basis of a semi-directive psychiatric interview as compulsions or tics. Results RB were present in 64.4% of patients with GTS (107/166) and categorised into 3 major groups: a ‘tic-like’ group (24.3%–40/166) characterised by RB such as touching, counting, ‘just right’ and symmetry searching; an ‘OCD-like’ group (20.5%–34/166) with washing and checking rituals; and a ‘mixed’ group (13.2%–22/166) with both ‘tics-like’ and ‘OCD-like’ types of RB present in the same patient. In 6.3% of patients, RB could not be classified into any of these groups and were thus considered ‘undetermined’. Conclusions The results confirm the phenomenological heterogeneity of RB in GTS patients and allows to distinguish two types: tic-like behaviours which are very likely an integral part of GTS; and OCD-like behaviours, which can be considered as a comorbid condition of GTS and were correlated with higher score of complex tics, neuroleptic and SSRIs treatment frequency and less successful socio-professional adaptation. We suggest that a meticulous semiological analysis of RB in GTS patients will help to tailor treatment and allow to better classify patients for future pathophysiologic studies. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00169351

STrengthening the reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology-Molecular Epidemiology (STROBE-ME): an extension of the STROBE statement

Advances in laboratory techniques have led to a rapidly increasing use of biomarkers in epidemiological studies. Biomarkers of internal dose, early biological change, susceptibility, and clinical outcomes are used as proxies for investigating the interactions between external and/or endogenous agents and the body components or processes. The need for improved reporting of scientific research led to influential statements of recommendations such as STrengthening Reporting of Observational studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement. The STROBE initiative established in 2004 aimed to provide guidance on how to report observational research. Its guidelines provide a user-friendly checklist of 22 items to be reported in epidemiological studies, with items specific to the three main study designs: cohort studies, case-control studies and cross-sectional studies. The present STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology-Molecular Epidemiology (STROBE-ME) initiative builds on the STROBE Statement implementing 9 existing items of STROBE and providing 17 additional items to the 22 items of STROBE checklist. The additions relate to the use of biomarkers in epidemiological studies, concerning collection, handling and storage of biological samples; laboratory methods, validity and reliability of biomarkers; specificities of study design; and ethical considerations. The STROBE-ME recommendations are intended to complement the STROBE recommendations.

CONSORT 2010 explanation and elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials

Overwhelming evidence shows the quality of reporting of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) is not optimal. Without transparent reporting, readers cannot judge the reliability and validity of trial findings nor extract information for systematic reviews. Recent methodological analyses indicate that inadequate reporting and design are associated with biased estimates of treatment effects. Such systematic error is seriously damaging to RCTs, which are considered the gold standard for evaluating interventions because of their ability to minimise or avoid bias. A group of scientists and editors developed the CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) statement to improve the quality of reporting of RCTs. It was first published in 1996 and updated in 2001. The statement consists of a checklist and flow diagram that authors can use for reporting an RCT. Many leading medical journals and major international editorial groups have endorsed the CONSORT statement. The statement facilitates critical appraisal and interpretation of RCTs. During the 2001 CONSORT revision, it became clear that explanation and elaboration of the principles underlying the CONSORT statement would help investigators and others to write or appraise trial reports. A CONSORT explanation and elaboration article was published in 2001 alongside the 2001 version of the CONSORT statement. After an expert meeting in January 2007, the CONSORT statement has been further revised and is published as the CONSORT 2010 Statement. This update improves the wording and clarity of the previous checklist and incorporates recommendations related to topics that have only recently received recognition, such as selective outcome reporting bias. This explanatory and elaboration document-intended to enhance the use, understanding, and dissemination of the CONSORT statement-has also been extensively revised. It presents the meaning and rationale for each new and updated checklist item providing examples of good reporting and, where possible, references to relevant empirical studies. Several examples of flow diagrams are included. The CONSORT 2010 Statement, this revised explanatory and elaboration document, and the associated website (www.consort-statement.org) should be helpful resources to improve reporting of randomised trials.

STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology--Molecular Epidemiology STROBE-ME: an extension of the STROBE statement

Advances in laboratory techniques have led to a rapidly increasing use of biomarkers in epidemiological studies. Biomarkers of internal dose, early biological change susceptibility and clinical outcomes are used as proxies for investigating the interactions between external and/or endogenous agents and body components or processes. The need for improved reporting of scientific research led to influential statements of recommendations such as the STrengthening Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement. The STROBE initiative established in 2004 aimed to provide guidance on how to report observational research. Its guidelines provide a user-friendly checklist of 22 items to be reported in epidemiological studies, with items specific to the three main study designs: cohort studies, case-control studies and cross-sectional studies. The present STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology -Molecular Epidemiology (STROBE-ME) initiative builds on the STROBE statement implementing 9 existing items of STROBE and providing 17 additional items to the 22 items of STROBE checklist. The additions relate to the use of biomarkers in epidemiological studies, concerning collection, handling and storage of biological samples; laboratory methods, validity and reliability of biomarkers; specificities of study design; and ethical considerations. The STROBE-ME recommendations are intended to complement the STROBE recommendations.

STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology - Molecular Epidemiology (STROBE-ME): an extension of the STROBE statement

Advances in laboratory techniques have led to a rapidly increasing use of biomarkers in epidemiological studies. Biomarkers of internal dose, early biological change, susceptibility and clinical outcomes are used as proxies for investigating the interactions between external and/or endogenous agents and the body components or processes. The need for improved reporting of scientific research led to influential statements of recommendations such as the STrenghtening Reporting of Observational studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement. The STROBE initiative established in 2004 aimed to provide guidance on how to report observational research. Its guidelines provide a user-friendly checklist of 22 items to be reported in epidemiological studies, with items specific to the three main study designs: cohort studies, case-control studies and cross-sectional studies. The present STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology - Molecular Epidemiology (STROBE-ME) initiative builds on the STROBE Statement implementing 9 existing items of STROBE and providing 17 additional items to the 22 items of STROBE checklist. The additions relate to the use of biomarkers in epidemiological studies, concerning collection, handling and storage of biological samples; laboratory methods, validity and reliability of biomarkers; specificities of study design; and ethical considerations. The STROBE-ME recommendations are intended to complement the STROBE recommendations.

STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology--Molecular Epidemiology (STROBE-ME): an extension of the STROBE statement

Advances in laboratory techniques have led to a rapidly increasing use of biomarkers in epidemiological studies. Biomarkers of internal dose, early biological change, susceptibility and clinical outcomes are used as proxies for investigating interactions between external and / or endogenous agents and body components or processes. The need for improved reporting of scientific research led to influential statements of recommendations such as the STrengthening Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement. The STROBE initiative established in 2004 aimed to provide guidance on how to report observational research. Its guidelines provide a user-friendly checklist of 22 items to be reported in epidemiological studies, with items specific to the three main study designs: cohort studies, case-control studies and cross-sectional studies. The present STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology - Molecular Epidemiology (STROBE-ME) initiative builds on the STROBE statement implementing nine existing items of STROBE and providing 17 additional items to the 22 items of STROBE checklist. The additions relate to the use of biomarkers in epidemiological studies, concerning collection, handling and storage of biological samples; laboratory methods, validity and reliability of biomarkers; specificities of study design; and ethical considerations. The STROBE-ME recommendations are intended to complement the STROBE recommendations.

STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology - Molecular Epidemiology (STROBE-ME): an extension of the STROBE statement

Advances in laboratory techniques have led to a rapidly increasing use of biomarkers in epidemiological studies. Biomarkers of internal dose, early biological change, susceptibility and clinical outcomes are used as proxies for investigating interactions between external and/or endogenous agents and body components or processes. The need for improved reporting of scientific research led to influential statements of recommendations such as the STrengthening Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement. The STROBE initiative established in 2004 aimed to provide guidance on how to report observational research. Its guidelines provide a user-friendly checklist of 22 items to be reported in epidemiological studies, with items specific to the three main study designs: cohort studies, case-control studies and cross-sectional studies. The present STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology -Molecular Epidemiology (STROBE-ME) initiative builds on the STROBE statement implementing nine existing items of STROBE and providing 17 additional items to the 22 items of STROBE checklist. The additions relate to the use of biomarkers in epidemiological studies, concerning collection, handling and storage of biological samples; laboratory methods, validity and reliability of biomarkers; specificities of study design; and ethical considerations. The STROBE-ME recommendations are intended to complement the STROBE recommendations.

Uses and misuses of the STROBE statement: bibliographic study

Objectives Appropriate reporting is central to the application of findings from research to clinical practice. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) recommendations consist of a checklist of 22 items that provide guidance on the reporting of cohort, case-control and cross-sectional studies, in order to facilitate critical appraisal and interpretation of results. STROBE was published in October 2007 in several journals including The Lancet, BMJ, Annals of Internal Medicine and PLoS Medicine. Within the framework of the revision of the STROBE recommendations, the authors examined the context and circumstances in which the STROBE statement was used in the past. Design The authors searched the Web of Science database in August 2010 for articles which cited STROBE and examined a random sample of 100 articles using a standardised, piloted data extraction form. The use of STROBE in observational studies and systematic reviews (including meta-analyses) was classified as appropriate or inappropriate. The use of STROBE to guide the reporting of observational studies was considered appropriate. Inappropriate uses included the use of STROBE as a tool to assess the methodological quality of studies or as a guideline on how to design and conduct studies. Results The authors identified 640 articles that cited STROBE. In the random sample of 100 articles, about half were observational studies (32%) or systematic reviews (19%). Comments, editorials and letters accounted for 15%, methodological articles for 8%, and recommendations and narrative reviews for 26% of articles. Of the 32 observational studies, 26 (81%) made appropriate use of STROBE, and three uses (10%) were considered inappropriate. Among 19 systematic reviews, 10 (53%) used STROBE inappropriately as a tool to assess study quality. Conclusions The STROBE reporting recommendations are frequently used inappropriately in systematic reviews and meta-analyses as an instrument to assess the methodological quality of observational studies.