Entrar/Registro  
HOME SPANISH
 
Cirugía y Cirujanos
   
MENU

Contents by Year, Volume and Issue

Table of Contents

General Information

Instructions for Authors

Message to Editor

Editorial Board






>Journals >Cirugía y Cirujanos >Year 2013, Issue 4


Mejia-Arangure JM, Grijalva-Otero I, Majluf-Cruz A, Cruz-López M, Núñez-Enríquez JC, Salamanca-Gómez FA
Guideline for the assessment of clinical research proposals
Cir Cir 2013; 81 (4)

Language: Español
References: 24
Page: 357-364
PDF: 272.16 Kb.

[Full text - PDF]

ABSTRACT

Background: Medical research is a fundamental tool to achieve the advancement of science, through the improvement of strategies aimed to protect, promote and restore individual´s and society´s health. Three characteristics are required to obtain approval of the research proposal: scientific relevance, technical quality and the accomplishment of ethical issues.
Objectives: The present review aimed at the determination of the specific criteria to perform a critical review of research proposals.
Methods: A research was carried out in the Pubmed, Medline, Ovid and Google Scholar databases, using the terms: peer review, research proposals, review and protocols, and reviewers. A total of 3546 related articles were reviewed, not founding a guide to critically assess research proposals. The guides to assess research articles consider that the quality criteria of the study should have been present since the study´s conception; many of the issues described to review articles are incorporated in the review of the research proposals.
Results: The specific criteria were integrated to allow the reviewer critically assess research proposals of different areas with scientific basis.
Conclusions: The reviewer of research proposals should be considered as a professional that contributes to the promotion of the knowledge´s advancement through his/her comments which allow researchers the improvement of the quality of research proposals.


Key words: peer review, research proposals, review and protocols and reviewers.


REFERENCES

  1. Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences. International ethical guidelines for biomedical research involving human subjects (CIOMS). Geneva, Suiza: Organización Mundial de la Salud 2002 (consultado 2012 Dic 13). Disponible en http://www. recerca.uab.es/ceeah/docs/CIOMS.pdf.

  2. Ley General de Salud. México: Diario Oficial de la Federación (Última reforma publicada el 25 de enero de 2013) (consultado 2013 Ene 25). Disponible en http://www.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBiblio/ pdf/142.pdf; http://dof.gob.mx/ley-reg.php.

  3. Guía Nacional para la Integración y el Funcionamiento de los Comités de Ética en Investigación. México: Comisión Nacional de Bioética (consultado 2013 Ene 30). Disponible en www.ccinshae. salud.gob.mx/descargas/Investigacion/guiacei.pdf.

  4. Hulley SB, Newman TM, Cummings SR. Introducción: anatomía y fisiología de la investigación clínica. En: Hulley SB, Cummings SR, Browner WS, Grady DG y Newman TM, editores. Diseño de Investigaciones Clínicas. Estados Unidos: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2007;3-16.

  5. Triaridis S, Kyrgidis A. Peer review and journal impact factor: the two pillars of contemporary medical publishing. Hippokratia 2010;14(Suppl 1):5-12.

  6. Emanuel EJ, Wendler D, Grady C. What Makes Clinical Research Ethical? JAMA 2000;283:2701-2711.

  7. Rodríguez YE. Comités de Evaluación Ética y Científica para la Investigación en seres humanos y las pautas CIOMS 2002. Acta Bioeth 2004 Abr 12;10(1):37-48. Disponible en http://www.scielo. cl/scielo.php?pid=S1726-569X2004000100005&script=sci_arttext.

  8. Chalmers I, Glasziou P. Avoidable Waste in the Production and Reporting of Research Evidence. Lancet 2009;374:86-89.

  9. Marks RG, Dawson-Saunders EK, Bailar JC, Dan BB, Verran JA. Interactions between statisticians and biomedical journal editors. Stat Med 1988;7:1003-1011.

  10. Reading the Medical Literature. Nueva York: McGraw-Hill 2004 (consultado 2012 Oct 27). Disponible en http://www.accessmedicine. com/content.aspx?aID=2049133.

  11. Uniform Requirements of Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals: Writing and Editing for Biomedical Publication. Vancouver: International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) 2010 (consultado 2012 Dic 1). Disponible en http://www.icmje.org/urm_main.html.

  12. An Instructional Guide for Peer Reviewers of Biomedical Manuscripts. Annals of Emergency Medicine (consultado 2012 Dic 5). Disponible en http://www3.us.elsevierhealth.com/extractor/ graphics/em-acep/index.html.

  13. Guía práctica de investigación en salud. Publicación Científica y Técnica No. 620. Redacción del protocolo de investigación: Presentación de una propuesta de investigación. Washington, D.C: Organización Panamericana de la Salud (OPS) 2008 (consultado 2012 Dic 2). Disponible en http://www.sld.cu/galerias/pdf/sitios/ rehabilitacion-bal/ops_protocolo.pdf.

  14. Haynes RB, Mulrow CD, Huth EJ, Altman DG, Gardner MJ. More Informative Abstracts Revisited. Ann Intern Med 1990;113:69-76.

  15. How to review the evidence: Systematic Identification and Review of the Scientific Literature. Canberra: National Health and Medical Research Council (NHRMC) 2000 (consultado 2012 Dic 12). Disponible en http://www.nhmrc.gov.au/_files_nhmrc/publications/ attachments/cp65.pdf.

  16. Green BN, Johnson CD, Adams A. Writing narrative literature reviews for peer-reviewed journals: secrets of the trade. J Chiropr Med 2006;5:101-117.

  17. Guideline for Critical Review Form. Quantitative Studies. Hamilton, Ontario: McMaster 1998 (consultado 2012 Dic 1). Disponible en http://www.srs-mcmaster.ca/Portals/20/pdf/ebp/quanguidelines.pdf.

  18. Kliewer MA. Writing it Up: A Step-by-Step Guide to Publication for Beginning Investigators. Canad J Med Technol 2007;38:27-33.

  19. Young JM, Solomon MJ. How to critically appraise an article. Nat Clin Pract Gastroenterol Hepatol 2009;6:82-91.

  20. Mejía-Aranguré JM, Salamanca Gómez Fabio. Temas prioritarios de salud en el Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social. En: Echeverría Zuno S, Lifshitz A, Salamanca Gómez F, editores. La Reforma de la Investigación en el IMSS 2006-2012. México: Coordinación de Comunicación Social del Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social, 2012;207-215.

  21. Villa Romero AR, Moreno Altamirano L, García de la Torre GS. Epidemiología y estadística en Salud Pública. México:McGraw-Hill- Interamericana, 2011.

  22. Mejía-Aranguré JM, Fajardo-Gutiérrez A, Gómez-Delgado A, Cuevas-Urióstegui ML, Hernández-Hernández DM, Garduño- Espinoza J, et al. El tamaño de muestra: un enfoque práctico en la investigación clínica pediátrica. Bol Med Hosp Infant Mex 1995;52:381-391.

  23. Sherrill JT, Sommers DI, Nierenberg AA, Leon AC, Arndt S, Bandeen-Roche, et al. Reintegrating Statistical and Clinical Research Elements in Intervention-Related Grant Applications: Summary from an NIMH Workshop. Acad Psychiatry 2009;33:221-228.

  24. Cummings SR, Hulley SB. Redacción y financiación de una propuesta de investigación. En: Hulley SB, Cummings SR, Browner WS, Grady DG y Newman TM, editores. Diseño de Investigaciones Clínicas. Estados Unidos: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2007;339- 355.






>Journals >Cirugía y Cirujanos >Year 2013, Issue 4
 

· Journal Index 
· Links 
       
Copyright 2010