| 李帅,方凯,孙傲伊,孙可欣,胡永华.遗传关联研究Meta分析中文文献方法学质量评价[J].中华流行病学杂志,2013,34(9):917-921 |
| 遗传关联研究Meta分析中文文献方法学质量评价 |
| Methodological quality of Meta-analyses regarding studies related to genetic association on papers published in Chinese journals |
| 收稿日期:2013-03-16 出版日期:2014-09-03 |
| DOI： |
| 中文关键词: 遗传关联研究|Meta分析|方法学|质量评价 |
| 英文关键词: Genetic association study|Meta-analysis|Methodology|Quality evaluation |
| 基金项目:国家自然科学基金(81230066) |
|
| 摘要点击次数: 3544 |
| 全文下载次数: 1639 |
| 中文摘要: |
| 目的 评价遗传关联研究Meta分析中文文献的方法学质量。方法 检索中国生物医学数据库、中国期刊全文数据库(CNKI)、万方数据资源系统和维普中国科技期刊全文数据库2012年12月前的遗传关联研究Meta分析文章。2名研究者独立按纳入排除标准进行文献筛选，意见不一致时咨询第三位研究者。运用系统综述评价工具(AMSTAR)量表对入选文献的方法学质量进行评价。结果 共纳入440篇文献。方法学质量得分平均为5．77分(满分11分)。没有文章符合AMSTAR量表全部11项条目的要求。人选文章中，89．5％有前期设计方案，38．6％在纳入文献和信息提取方面有可重复性，72．7％实施了广泛文献检索，14．8％考虑了文献发表状态，10．9％提供了纳入和排除文献清单，92．5％描述了纳入文献特征，32．0％评估了文献质量，50．0％将文献质量用于结论推导，93．2％合并文献结果方法恰当，82．3％评估了发表偏倚，0．5％声明利益冲突。结论 遗传关联研究Meta分析中文文章方法学质量中等，在文献的筛选和信息提取、考虑文献的发表情况、提供纳人和排除文献清单、对文献进行质量评估、声明利益冲突等方面需要提高。 |
| 英文摘要: |
| 0bjeetive To assess the methodological quality of Meta-analyses on papers published in Chinese journals regarding studies on genetic association．Methods Meta-analyses of genetic association study published in Chinese journals up to December 2012 had been searched through on 4 Chinese electronic databases(China biomedicine database，CNKI，Wanfang database and VIP Information)．Articles independently selected by both two researchers under definite inclusion and exclusion criteria were included in this study(with consultation on a third researcher if inconsistent opinions existed)．A Measurement Tool for the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR)checklist was used to evaluate the methodological quality together with the methodological quality score being calculated．Results Totally，440 articles were included in this studv．with mean score of the methodological quality score(maximum score is 11)as 5．77．Among the 440 articles．none had met the requirement of total 11 items in AMSTAR，wim 89．5％and 38．6％ of them had a priori design or duplicate study selection and data extraction．72．7％ of them performed a comprehensive literature search and 14．8％included studies regardless of their publication status． 10．9％ and 92．5％of them provided a list of including or excluding studies or stated characteristics of the included ones．32．0％of them assessed the scientific quality of those included studies，with 50．0％ of them mentioned their qualities when formulating the conclusions．93．2％ of them used appropriate methods to combine data while 82．3％ assessed the likelihood of publication bias．0．5％ of them declared the conflict of interests．Conclusion Our results from Meta-analyses showed all acceptable quality regarding their methodology related to genetic association on papers being published in Chinese ioumals．Improvement is needed especially on aspects as：selection of studies，data extraction， publication status with list of inclusion and exclusion．quality assessment and declaration on conflict of interests，etc． |
|
查看全文
Html全文
查看/发表评论 下载PDF阅读器 |
|
| 关闭 |
