论文部分内容阅读
目的评价国内发表的中西医治疗非小细胞肺癌(NSCLC)的系统评价/Meta分析(SR/MA)的方法学质量。方法计算机检索Pub Med、EMbase、CBM、CNKI、VIP和Wan Fang Data,搜集关于中西医治疗NSCLC的SR/MA的文献,检索时间从建库至2016年7月10日,同时手工检索《中国循证医学杂志》等杂志及纳入文献的参考文献,并努力查找灰色文献等。由2名研究人员独立筛选文献、提取资料后,采用AMSTAR评价量表对文献的方法学质量进行评价。结果共纳入53个SR/MA,文献方法学质量评分最高为8分,最低为1分,平均5.98±1.50分。中等质量者47篇(88.68%),低质量者6篇(11.32%)。问题主要体现在未提供前期设计方案,文献检索不够全面系统,未提供纳入和排除的研究文献清单等方面。结论目前国内杂志发表的中西医治疗NSCLC的SR/MA尚存在不同程度的方法学质量问题,需进一步提高方法学质量并规范报告。
Objective To evaluate the methodological quality of systematic reviews / meta-analysis (SR / MA) of Chinese and Western medical treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) published in China. Methods PubMed, EMbase, CBM, CNKI, VIP and Wan Fang Data were searched by computer. The documents about SR / MA of NSCLC treated by TCM and Western medicine were collected. The search time was from database construction to July 10, 2016. Meanwhile, Journal of Medicine "and other magazines and literature references, and strive to find gray literature. Two researchers independently screened the literature, extracted data, and assessed the methodological quality of the literature using the AMSTAR Rating Scale. Results A total of 53 SR / MA were enrolled in this study. The highest score of methodological quality was 8, the lowest was 1, and the average was 5.98 ± 1.50. 47 were middle-quality (88.68%), 6 were low-quality (11.32%). The problems are mainly reflected in the failure to provide pre-design solutions, incomplete systematic literature search, and a list of research documents that are not included or excluded. Conclusion At present, the SR / MA of NSCLC treated by the Chinese and western medicine published in domestic journals still has some problems of methodological quality, so it is necessary to further improve the methodological quality and standardize the report.