中华创伤骨科杂志
中華創傷骨科雜誌
중화창상골과잡지
CHINESE JOURNAL OF ORTHOPAEDIC TRAUMA
2015年
5期
399-404
,共6页
丁凡%任义军%赵志明%胡锐%李明静%勘武生
丁凡%任義軍%趙誌明%鬍銳%李明靜%勘武生
정범%임의군%조지명%호예%리명정%감무생
Meta分析%系统评价%学术论文%质量控制%评价研究
Meta分析%繫統評價%學術論文%質量控製%評價研究
Meta분석%계통평개%학술논문%질량공제%평개연구
Meta-analysis%Systematic reviews%Dissertation academic%Quality control%Evaluation studies
目的 评价《中华创伤骨科杂志》公开发表的Meta分析(MA)/系统评价(SR)的报告质量及方法学质量.方法 计算机检索万方数据库1999年9月至2013年12月发表于《中华创伤骨科杂志》的MA/SR文章,并进行手工检索.由2名独立研究者按照纳入和排除标准筛查文章,应用系统综述和Meta分析优先报告的条目规范量表(PRISMA)及方法学质量评价量表(AMSTAR)对纳入文章进行评价,并比较2010年前、后发表的MA/SR文章的PRISMA评分和AMSTAR评分. 结果 共纳入23篇MA/SR文章,PRISMA评分为15 ~ 26分,平均(20.7±2.3)分;严重报告缺陷1篇(4.3%),一定缺陷12篇(52.2%),相对完全10篇(43.5%).AMSTAR评分为3~8分,平均(6.2±1.4)分;低质量2篇(8.7%),中等质量21篇(91.3%).2010年后发表的MA/SR文章PRISMA评分[(20.7±2.8)分]和AMSTAR评分[(6.3±1.4)分]较2010年前发表的MA/SR文章[(20.6±1.6)、(6.0±1.5)分]稍有提高,但差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05).报告质量仍存在方案注册、研究选择及研究间偏倚,附加分析和资助来源等条目不全面.方法学质量评价存在前期设计方案缺失、未考虑发表情况、未评估发表偏倚及未说明相关利益冲突等缺陷. 结论 《中华创伤骨科杂志》发表的MA/SR文章质量尚可,为相关疾病的诊断、治疗提供了可靠的证据,但其报告规范及方法学质量还有进一步提升的空间.
目的 評價《中華創傷骨科雜誌》公開髮錶的Meta分析(MA)/繫統評價(SR)的報告質量及方法學質量.方法 計算機檢索萬方數據庫1999年9月至2013年12月髮錶于《中華創傷骨科雜誌》的MA/SR文章,併進行手工檢索.由2名獨立研究者按照納入和排除標準篩查文章,應用繫統綜述和Meta分析優先報告的條目規範量錶(PRISMA)及方法學質量評價量錶(AMSTAR)對納入文章進行評價,併比較2010年前、後髮錶的MA/SR文章的PRISMA評分和AMSTAR評分. 結果 共納入23篇MA/SR文章,PRISMA評分為15 ~ 26分,平均(20.7±2.3)分;嚴重報告缺陷1篇(4.3%),一定缺陷12篇(52.2%),相對完全10篇(43.5%).AMSTAR評分為3~8分,平均(6.2±1.4)分;低質量2篇(8.7%),中等質量21篇(91.3%).2010年後髮錶的MA/SR文章PRISMA評分[(20.7±2.8)分]和AMSTAR評分[(6.3±1.4)分]較2010年前髮錶的MA/SR文章[(20.6±1.6)、(6.0±1.5)分]稍有提高,但差異均無統計學意義(P>0.05).報告質量仍存在方案註冊、研究選擇及研究間偏倚,附加分析和資助來源等條目不全麵.方法學質量評價存在前期設計方案缺失、未攷慮髮錶情況、未評估髮錶偏倚及未說明相關利益遲突等缺陷. 結論 《中華創傷骨科雜誌》髮錶的MA/SR文章質量尚可,為相關疾病的診斷、治療提供瞭可靠的證據,但其報告規範及方法學質量還有進一步提升的空間.
목적 평개《중화창상골과잡지》공개발표적Meta분석(MA)/계통평개(SR)적보고질량급방법학질량.방법 계산궤검색만방수거고1999년9월지2013년12월발표우《중화창상골과잡지》적MA/SR문장,병진행수공검색.유2명독립연구자안조납입화배제표준사사문장,응용계통종술화Meta분석우선보고적조목규범량표(PRISMA)급방법학질량평개량표(AMSTAR)대납입문장진행평개,병비교2010년전、후발표적MA/SR문장적PRISMA평분화AMSTAR평분. 결과 공납입23편MA/SR문장,PRISMA평분위15 ~ 26분,평균(20.7±2.3)분;엄중보고결함1편(4.3%),일정결함12편(52.2%),상대완전10편(43.5%).AMSTAR평분위3~8분,평균(6.2±1.4)분;저질량2편(8.7%),중등질량21편(91.3%).2010년후발표적MA/SR문장PRISMA평분[(20.7±2.8)분]화AMSTAR평분[(6.3±1.4)분]교2010년전발표적MA/SR문장[(20.6±1.6)、(6.0±1.5)분]초유제고,단차이균무통계학의의(P>0.05).보고질량잉존재방안주책、연구선택급연구간편의,부가분석화자조래원등조목불전면.방법학질량평개존재전기설계방안결실、미고필발표정황、미평고발표편의급미설명상관이익충돌등결함. 결론 《중화창상골과잡지》발표적MA/SR문장질량상가,위상관질병적진단、치료제공료가고적증거,단기보고규범급방법학질량환유진일보제승적공간.
Objective To assess the reporting and methodological quality of meta-analyses(MA) and systematic reviews(SR) published in Chinese Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma.Methods The MA/SR published in Chinese Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma from September 1999 to December 2013 were searched for via Wanfang Database and by hand.Two investigators screened documents independently according to inclusion and exclusion criteria.Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) and Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) Scales were used to evaluate the reporting and methodological quality of cited studies around 2010.Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS 20.0.Results Twenty-three MA/SR studies were identified.Their average PRISMA score was 20.7 ±2.3 (range,from 15 to 26).As for the reporting quality,severe flaws were identified in one study(4.3%),moderate flaws in 12 studies(52.2%) and mild flaws in 10(43.5%).The average AMSTAR score was 6.2 ± 1.4 (range,from 3 to 8).The methodological quality was graded as low in 2 (8.7%) and as fair in 21 (91.3%) studies.The PRISMA score (20.7 ±2.8) and the AMSTAR score (6.3 ± 1.4) of MA/SR published after 2010 were insignificantly higher than those before 2010 (20.6 ± 1.6 and 6.0 ± 1.5 respectively) (P > 0.05).The reporting flaws lay in the items of Protocol and Registration,Study Selection,Risk of Bias across Studies,Additional Analysis and Funding.The main methodological flaws involved Priori Design,Publication Status,Assessment of Publication Bias and Statement of Conflict of Interest.Conclusions Since the quality of MA/SR published in Chinese Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma was generally fair,the MA/ SR studies might have provide reliable evidence for clinical practice.Their reporting and methodological quality,however,deserves to be improved.