| 车鹏,胡俊,唐雪莉,黄可,黎林果,银春燕.《四川精神卫生》杂志发表的干预类随机对照试验的系统评价／Meta分析方法学质量评价[J].四川精神卫生杂志,2022,35(2):188-193.Che Peng,Hu Jun,Tang Xueli,Huang Ke,Li Linguo,Yin Chunyan,Methodological quality assessment of systematic reviews or Meta-analyses of intervention randomized controlled trials published in the Sichuan Mental Health[J].SICHUAN MENTAL HEALTH,2022,35(2):188-193 |
| 《四川精神卫生》杂志发表的干预类随机对照试验的系统评价／Meta分析方法学质量评价 |
| Methodological quality assessment of systematic reviews or Meta-analyses of intervention randomized controlled trials published in the Sichuan Mental Health |
| 投稿时间：2021-08-04 |
| DOI：10.11886/scjsws20210804001 |
| 中文关键词: 系统评价 Meta分析 报告质量 AMSTAR 2 四川精神卫生 |
| 英文关键词:Systematic review Meta-analysis Reporting quality AMSTAR 2 Sichuan Mental Health |
| 基金项目:四川省卫生健康委员会科研课题（项目名称：辩证行为团体治疗在边缘型人格障碍的结构化治疗探索，项目编号：19PJ053） |
|
| 摘要点击次数: |
| 全文下载次数: |
| 中文摘要: |
| 目的 对《四川精神卫生》杂志发表的干预类随机对照试验（RCT）的系统评价／Meta分析（SR/MA）文献的方法学质量进行评价。方法 计算机检索万方数据库、中国知网、维普数据库、中国生物医学文献数据库中《四川精神卫生》杂志从创刊至2021年6月30日所发表的干预类RCT的SR/MA，采用AMSTAR 2对纳入文献的方法学质量进行评价。结果 纳入干预类RCT的SR/MA共24篇，其AMSTAR 2总评分为1~11分［（5.21±3.63）分］。AMSTAR 2发布前与发布后发表（t=-5.499）、作者数≤2人与作者数≥3人（t=-6.736）、有无基金资助（t=3.329）、不同作者单位性质（F=7.827）的文献AMSTAR 2总评分差异均有统计学意义（P均<0.01）。24篇文献主要存在的问题是均未提及如下内容：前期方案设计与注册、排除文献的清单及排除理由、系统评价中纳入研究的资金来源、任何潜在的利益冲突及开展系统评价所接受的任何资助。结论 《四川精神卫生》杂志发表的干预类RCT的SR/MA方法学质量参差不齐。AMSTAR 2发布后所发表的SR/MA方法学质量有所提高，但仍需进一步规范报告以提供高质量的循证证据。 |
| 英文摘要: |
| Objective To evaluate the methodological quality of systematic review / Meta analysis （SR/MA） of intervention randomized controlled trial （RCT） published in the Sichuan Mental Health.Methods The literature databases such as Wanfang Data， China National Knowledge Infrastructure （CNKI）， VIP Database for Chinese Technical Periodical （VIP） and Chinese Biomedical Literature Database （CBM） were searched for the SRs/MAs of intervention RCTs published in the Sichuan Mental Health from the initial issue to the issue published on 31 June 2021. Then the methodological quality of eligible SRs/MAs were assessed using A Measurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews 2 （AMSTAR 2）.Results The literature search yielded 24 full-text articles， and the mean AMSTAR 2 score of the included SRs/MAs was （5.21±3.63） with a range from 1 to 11. The total AMSTAR 2 score for SRs/MAs showed difference in terms of the publication date prior to or later than the publication of AMSTAR-2 tool （t=-5.499）， number of authors ≤ 2 or ≥ 3 （t=-6.736）， with or without funding support （t=3.329） and author unit nature （F=7.827）， with statistical significance （P<0.01）. All selected studies had deficiencies on explicit statement of a priori design and registrations， list of excluded studies and reasons for exclusion， sources of funding for the research in systematic review， potential conflicts of interest statement， and funding information of the systematic review.Conclusion The methodological quality of SRs/MAs of intervention RCTs published in the Sichuan Mental Health varies widely， After the release of AMSTAR 2， the methodological quality has improved， but the report still needs to be further standardized to provide high-quality evidence-based evidence. |
| 查看全文 查看/发表评论 下载PDF阅读器 |
| 关闭 |