Bibliometric analysis of the clinical studies about catheter depth of the retention enema in China
10.3760/cma.j.issn.1674-2907.2016.32.005
- VernacularTitle:我国保留灌肠插管深度临床研究的文献计量学分析
- Author:
Sisi WU
1
;
Hongxia LIU
;
Shujin YUE
;
Chunxiang SU
Author Information
1. 100029,北京中医药大学护理学院
- Keywords:
Bibliometric analysis;
Retention enema;
Catheter depth
- From:
Chinese Journal of Modern Nursing
2016;22(32):4602-4607
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective To know the research status and the tendency of development about the catheter depth of retention enema.Methods All the clinical studies about the catheter depth of retention enema were searched in China national knowledge internet (CNKI),VIP,Chinese biological medical disc and WanFang database from January 26th 2016.Bibliometric analysis was used to analyze these articles from the distribution of the year,periodical,region,work unit,fund,study type and the characteristics of included studies.Results A total of 76 articles were included and the number of published articles was stable in recent years.The majority was journal articles and was published in nursing journals.Most of the published articles were from Shandong,Guangdong and Sichuan province.Most of the authors were work in hospitals.Funding source was poor.58 (76.3％) articles were about random control trails (RCTs).The catheter depth in the experimental group was 3-60 cm;the number of samples included in the study was 15-560,while none was estimated.8 studies reported the inclusion criteria,and 6 studies reported the exclusion criteria.Baseline comparability was reported in 50 studies.Conclusions Although the number of clinical studies on the catheter depth of retention enema is at the stable stage,the study design and methodological quality still need to be further improved.Researchers should follow the principle of randomization,control and blinding in the future researches;specify the strict inclusion and exclusion criteria;and set up a reasonable control to ensure the authenticity and reliability of the findings.
