Jadad A R, Moher M, Browman G P, Booker L, Sigouin C, Fuentes M, Stevens R
Department of Clinical Epidemiology, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada L8N 3Z5.
BMJ. 2000 Feb 26;320(7234):537-40. doi: 10.1136/bmj.320.7234.537.
To evaluate the clinical, methodological, and reporting aspects of systematic reviews and meta-analyses on the treatment of asthma and to compare those published by the Cochrane Collaboration with those published in paper based journals.
Analysis of studies identified from Medline, CINAHL, HealthSTAR, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, personal collections, and reference lists.
Articles describing a systematic review or a meta-analysis of the treatment of asthma that were published as a full report, in any language or format, in a peer reviewed journal or the Cochrane Library.
General characteristics of studies reviewed and methodological characteristics (sources of articles; language restrictions; format, design, and publication status of studies included; type of data synthesis; and methodological quality).
50 systematic reviews and meta-analyses were included. More than half were published in the past two years. Twelve reviews were published in the Cochrane Library and 38 were published in 22 peer reviewed journals. Forced expiratory volume in one second was the most frequently used outcome, but few reviews evaluated the effect of treatment on costs or patient preferences. Forty reviews were judged to have serious or extensive flaws. All six reviews associated with industry were in this group. Seven of the 10 most rigorous reviews were published in the Cochrane Library.
Most reviews published in peer reviewed journals or funded by industry have serious methodological flaws that limit their value to guide decisions. Cochrane reviews are more rigorous and better reported than those published in peer reviewed journals.
评估关于哮喘治疗的系统评价和荟萃分析的临床、方法学及报告方面，并比较Cochrane协作网发表的与纸质期刊发表的此类研究。
对从Medline、CINAHL、HealthSTAR、EMBASE、Cochrane图书馆、个人收藏及参考文献列表中识别出的研究进行分析。
描述哮喘治疗的系统评价或荟萃分析的文章，以任何语言或格式发表在同行评审期刊或Cochrane图书馆的完整报告中。
所综述研究的一般特征及方法学特征（文章来源；语言限制；纳入研究的格式、设计及发表状态；数据合成类型；方法学质量）。
纳入50项系统评价和荟萃分析。超过半数在过去两年发表。12项综述发表于Cochrane图书馆，38项发表于22种同行评审期刊。一秒用力呼气量是最常使用的结局指标，但很少有综述评估治疗对成本或患者偏好的影响。40项综述被判定存在严重或广泛缺陷。与行业相关的所有6项综述均在此组。10项最严谨的综述中有7项发表于Cochrane图书馆。
大多数发表于同行评审期刊或由行业资助的综述存在严重的方法学缺陷，限制了其指导决策的价值。Cochrane综述比发表于同行评审期刊的综述更严谨，报告也更好。
