中国科学引文数据库收录期刊的系统评价/Meta分析文献方法学质量评价  

Methodological Quality Analysis of Systematic Review/Meta⁃analysis Published in Chinese Science Citation Database Journals

作　　者：刘辉[1] 苏仁凤 石安娅 姚媛媛 周奇[3] 王子君 铁锐 卢梦颖 张豪 孙浩楠 赵俊贤 赵思雅 杨克虎[3] 刘兴荣[1] 陈耀龙 LIU Hui;SU Renfeng;SHI Anya;YAO Yuanyuan;ZHOU Qi;WANG Zijun;TIE Rui;LU Mengying;ZHANG Hao;SUN Haonan;ZHAO Junxian;ZHAO Siya;YANG Kehu;LIU Xingrong;CHEN Yaolong(School of Public Health,Lanzhou University,Lanzhou 730000,China;The Second Clinical Medical Hospital,Lanzhou University,Lanzhou 730000,China;Evidence-based Medicine Center,School of Basic Medical Sciences,Lanzhou University,Lanzhou 730000,China;The First School of Clinical Medicine,Lanzhou University,Lanzhou 730000,China;Institute of Health Data Science,Lanzhou University,Lanzhou 730000,China;Research Unit of Evidence-based Evaluation and Guidelines,Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences,School of Basic Medical Sciences,Lanzhou University,Lanzhou 730000,China;WHO Collaborating Center for Guideline Implementation and Knowledge Translation,Lanzhou 730000,China;Lanzhou University,An Affiliate of the Cochrane China Network,Lanzhou 730000,China;Lanzhou University GRADE Center,Lanzhou 730000,China)

机构地区：[1]兰州大学公共卫生学院,兰州730000 [2]兰州大学第二临床医学院,兰州730000 [3]兰州大学基础医学院循证医学中心,兰州730000 [4]兰州大学第一临床医学院,兰州730000 [5]兰州大学健康数据科学研究院,兰州730000 [6]中国医学科学院循证评价与指南研究创新单元兰州大学基础医学院,兰州730000 [7]世界卫生组织指南实施与知识转化合作中心,兰州7300008 [8]Cochrane中国协作网兰州大学分中心,兰州730000 [9]兰州大学GRADE中心,兰州730000

出　　处：《协和医学杂志》2023年第2期390-398,共9页Medical Journal of Peking Union Medical College Hospital

基　　金：中央高校基本科研业务费专项资金(lzujbky-2021-ey13);中国医学科学院医学与健康科技创新工程-循证评价与指南研究创新单元(2021RU017);兰州大学“一带一路”专项经费。

摘　　要：目的评价中国科学引文数据库(Chinese Science Citation Database,CSCD)收录期刊2020年发表的系统评价/Meta分析(systematic review/meta analysis,SR/MA)文献的方法学质量,旨在为我国研究人员制作SR/MA提供建议,为编辑和审稿专家审阅SR/MA提供参考。方法以CSCD收录的中华医学会杂志社系列期刊为样本形成期刊列表。4名研究人员两两分组独立进行手动检索,纳入期刊发表于2020年的SR/MA文献,1名研究人员在中国知网进行补充检索。研究人员两两分组对纳入的研究进行独立筛选和信息提取,使用AMSTAR 2(A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews 2,AMSTAR 2)评价工具进行方法学质量评价并对评价结果进行统计学分析。结果共79本中华医学会杂志社系列期刊被CSCD收录,其中46本期刊在2020年发表SR/MA文献,按照纳入和排除标准进行筛选,共纳入126篇SR/MA文献。AMSTAR 2评价结果显示,SR/MA文献的平均得分为(10.38±1.91)分;9个条目的符合/部分符合比例在70%以上;SR/MA至少符合/部分符合5个AMSTAR 2条目,最多符合/部分符合12个条目;关键条目未调整前超过90%的SR/MA可信度分级为“极低”,结合国内实际情况调整关键条目后,分别有约40%的SR/MA可信度分级为“中”和“低”;分层分析结果显示,是否使用GRADE分级、是否遵循PRISMA声明、作者数量是否>5、发表语种是否不同、纳入研究类型是否包括随机对照试验和是否报告资金资助均不是SR/MA方法学质量的影响因素。结论CSCD收录期刊2020年发表的SR/MA文献方法学质量仍有待提高,未来应重点关注SR/MA的注册、检索、纳入和排除标准及资金资助等问题,以切实提高SR/MA的方法学质量。Objective To evaluate the methodological quality of systematic review/meta analysis(SR/MA)published in Chinese Science Citation Database(CSCD)journals in 2020,with the aim of providing sug⁃gestions for researchers in China to develop SR/MA and reference for editors and reviewers to review SR/MA.Methods The list of journals was formed with a sample of journals published by the Chinese Medical Associa⁃ion Publishing House and included in CSCD.Four researchers working in pairs conducted independently manu⁃al searches on the official websites of the journals to include SR/MA published in 2020,and one researcher conducted a supplementary search on China National Knowledge Infrastructure.After identifying the included literature,the researchers worked in pairs to extract information independently,evaluated methodological qual⁃ity by using AMSTAR 2(A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews 2)and performed statistical analysis of the results.Results A total of 79 journals from the Chinese Medical Association Publishing House were included in CSCD,46 of which published SR/MA in 2020,and 126 SR/MA were included for analysis after screening according to inclusion and exclusion criteria.AMSTAR 2 evaluation results showed that the average score of SR/MA was 10.38±1.91.The scored proportion of 9 items was more than 70%.SR/MA met partially/met a minimum of 5 AMSTAR 2 items and a maximum of 12 items.Before the key items were adjusted,over 90%of SR/MA’s credibility rating was critically low.After adjusting the key items according to the actual Chinese situation,about 40%of SR/MA’s credibility rating was medium and low,respectively.The results of the stratified analysis showed that the use of GRADE,adherence to the PRISMA statement,the number of authors greater than 5,the language of publication,the type of included studies including RCTs,and the reporting of funding were not factors that influenced the methodological quality of SR/MA.Conclusions The methodologi⁃cal quality of SR/MA published in CSCD journals

关 键 词：中国科学引文数据库期刊 系统评价 META分析 方法学质量 

分 类 号：R181.2[医药卫生—流行病学]