METHODS: This commentary examines common sources of waste in SMT research, focusing on design and methodological issues, by drawing on prior research and examples from clinical and mechanistic SMT studies. Clinical research is dominated by small studies and studies with a high risk of bias. This problem is compounded by systematic reviews that pool heterogenous data from varying populations, settings, and application of SMT. Research focusing on the mechanisms of SMT often fails to address the clinical relevance of mechanisms, relies on very short follow-up periods, and has inadequate control for contextual factors.
CONCLUSIONS: This call to action is directed to researchers in the field of SMT. It is critical that the SMT research community act to improve the way research is designed, conducted, and disseminated. We present specific key action points and resources, which should enhance the quality and usefulness of future SMT research.
方法:本评论探讨了SMT研究中常见的废物来源,专注于设计和方法论问题,通过借鉴先前的研究和临床和机械SMT研究的例子。临床研究以小型研究和具有高偏倚风险的研究为主。这个问题因汇集来自不同人群的异质数据的系统评价而变得更加复杂,设置,SMT的应用。专注于SMT机制的研究往往无法解决机制的临床相关性,依赖于非常短的随访期,并且对上下文因素控制不足。
结论:此行动呼吁针对SMT领域的研究人员。SMT研究界采取行动改进研究设计的方式至关重要,进行了,并传播。我们提出具体的关键行动要点和资源,这将提高未来SMT研究的质量和实用性。