脑胶质瘤干预类系统评价/Meta分析的方法学和报告质量评价  

Methodological and Reporting Quality of Systematic Reviews/Meta-Analyses of Interventions in Gliomas

作　　者：王振伟[1] 李峤[2] 马弟娃 牛小东[3] 王文涛[3] 田宏亮[3] 潘亚文[2] 

机构地区：[1]兰州大学第一临床医学院,兰州730000 [2]兰州大学第二医院,兰州730000 [3]兰州大学第二临床医学院,兰州730000

出　　处：《中国循证医学杂志》2014年第12期1520-1526,共7页Chinese Journal of Evidence-based Medicine

摘　　要：目的系统评价全世界脑胶质瘤干预类系统评价/Meta分析(SR/MA)的方法学和报告质量。方法计算机检索Pub Med、EMbase、h e Cochrane Library、CNKI、CBM等数据库,纳入脑胶质瘤干预类SR/MA,检索时限截至2013年7月。由2位研究者独立筛选文献,而后采用AMSTAR和PRISMA清单对纳入研究的方法学与报告质量进行评价与分析。结果共纳入51个SR/MA。结果显示:纳入研究中方法学质量存在的主要问题有无研究设计方案、检索策略不全面、纳入研究出版物形式局限、未评价文章发表偏倚及未说明相关利益冲突;纳入研究的报告质量存在的主要问题是检索策略的报告不规范、纳入研究质量和偏倚风险报道不全面和研究结果表述不全(部分缺乏森林图、综合结果的估计值和可信区间、异质性检验结果)。结论脑胶质瘤干预类SR/MA的方法学质量和报告质量还存在不同程度的问题,该领域研究者应提高SR/MA制作的科学性和规范性,并遵循PRISMA进行报告。Objective To systematically review methodological and reporting quality of systematic reviews/metaanalyses of interventions in the global research field on gliomas. Methods Databases including PubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library, CNKI and CBM were searched from inception to July 2013, for systematic reviews/meta-analyses of interventions in the research field on gliomas. Two reviewers independently screened literature. Then PRISMA and AM- STAR checklists were used to assess and analysis methodological and reporting quality of included studies. Results A total of 51 systematic reviews or meta-analyses were identified. The results showed that the weakness of methodological quality mainly contained lack of study design, incomprehensive of literature search, limited form of included publications, lack of assessing publication bias, lack of reporting of conflict of interest. The weakness of reporting quality included incomplete reporting of literature search, quality assessment, risk of bias and results （some studies lacked forest plots, estimated value of pooled results, 95%CI, and heterogeneity）. Conclusion There are problems at different levels regarding current methodological and reporting quality of systematic reviews/meta-analyses of interventions in the global research field on gliomas. The relevant researchers should improve the scientificity and standardization of systematic reviews/meta-analyses and report them according to the PRISMA statement.

关 键 词：胶质瘤 系统评价 META分析 质量评价 

分 类 号：R739.41[医药卫生—肿瘤]