Does qualitative synthesis of anecdotal evidence with that from scientific research help in understanding public health issues: a review of low MMR uptake
Does qualitative synthesis of anecdotal evidence with that from scientific research help in understanding public health issues: a review of low MMR uptake
复制标题
轶事证据与科学研究证据的定性综合是否有助于理解公共卫生问题：对 MMR 低吸收率的回顾
DOI：
10.1093/eurpub/cki058
复制
发表时间：
2006-02-01
影响因子：
4.4
通讯作者：
Nagaraj, A
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Nagaraj, A
研究目标：通过对技术和非技术轶事文献中的证据进行定性综合，探讨 MMR 摄取率低背后的职业和父母因素。方法：使用设计的检索策略对涵盖研究、媒体、网络、E 组和灰色文献的文献进行深入调查。从研究和轶事证据中确定了关键主题，并将其合并形成共同主题。结果：对技术文献的审查发现，媒体恐慌和卫生专业人员提供的信息不足是不接受 MMR 的主要原因。非技术性的轶事证据表明，专业人士相信父母的选择权、目标付款和对自闭症的恐惧是主要因素。结论：轶事证据可能有助于循证公共卫生实践，特别是在广泛争论的公共卫生问题上。
Study objective: To explore the professional and parental factors underlying low MMR uptake by qualitative synthesis of evidence from technical and non-technical anecdotal literature. Methods: An intensive investigation of literature covering research, press, online, E groups and grey literature was carried out using devised search strategies. Key themes were identified from both the research and anecdotal evidence, which were merged to form common themes. Results: The review of technical literature identified media scare and inadequate information from health professionals as the main reasons for non-uptake of MMR. The non-technical anecdotal evidence showed that professionals' belief in parental right to choose, target payments and fear of autism were the major factors. Conclusions: Anecdotal evidence may contribute to evidence-based public health practice, especially in widely debated public health issues.