• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利：CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法，用中文像聊天一样搜索，搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐，让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版，准确专业，支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式，支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述，25分钟生成高质量综述，智能提取关键信息，辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

Systematic reviews in health care: Assessing the quality of controlled clinical trials.

作者信息

Jüni P, Altman D G, Egger M

机构信息

Department of Social and Preventive Medicine, University of Bern, Bern, 3012 Switzerland.

出版信息

BMJ. 2001 Jul 7;323(7303):42-6. doi: 10.1136/bmj.323.7303.42.

DOI:10.1136/bmj.323.7303.42
PMID:11440947
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC1120670/
Abstract
摘要

相似文献

1
Systematic reviews in health care: Assessing the quality of controlled clinical trials.医疗保健中的系统评价：评估对照临床试验的质量。
BMJ. 2001 Jul 7;323(7303):42-6. doi: 10.1136/bmj.323.7303.42.
2
Introduction to cumulative meta-analysis in dentistry: lessons learned from undertaking a cumulative meta-analysis in periodontology.牙科累积荟萃分析简介：从牙周病学累积荟萃分析中吸取的经验教训。
J Dent Res. 2005 Apr;84(4):345-9. doi: 10.1177/154405910508400410.
3
Clinical research on acupuncture. Part 2. Controlled clinical trials, an overview of their methods.针灸临床研究。第2部分。对照临床试验，其方法概述。
J Altern Complement Med. 2004 Jun;10(3):481-98. doi: 10.1089/1075553041323911.
4
Investigating clinical heterogeneity in systematic reviews: a methodologic review of guidance in the literature.系统评价中临床异质性的研究：文献中指导方法的综述。
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2012 Jul 30;12:111. doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-12-111.
5
The powerful placebo: doubting the doubters.强效安慰剂：质疑怀疑者
Adv Mind Body Med. 2001 Fall;17(4):298-307; discussion 312-8.
6
Searching for unpublished trials in Cochrane reviews may not be worth the effort.在Cochrane系统评价中搜索未发表的试验可能不值得费力。
J Clin Epidemiol. 2009 Aug;62(8):838-844.e3. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2008.09.010. Epub 2009 Jan 6.
7
Are all clinical caries prevention studies biased?所有临床龋齿预防研究都存在偏差吗？
J Dent Res. 2000 Mar;79(3):796-7. doi: 10.1177/00220345000790030201.
8
[Assessment of clinical trial quality and its impact on meta-analyses].[临床试验质量评估及其对荟萃分析的影响]
Rev Saude Publica. 2005 Dec;39(6):865-73. doi: 10.1590/s0034-89102005000600001. Epub 2005 Dec 7.
9
The Meaning and Influence of Time-Related Dropout Dynamics in Antidepressant Studies: Reassessing Current Approaches.抗抑郁药物研究中与时间相关的失访动态的意义及影响：重新评估当前方法
Psychother Psychosom. 2019;88(1):37-38. doi: 10.1159/000496498. Epub 2019 Jan 30.
10
Evidence-based medicine, systematic reviews, and guidelines in interventional pain management: part 6. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of observational studies.基于证据的医学、系统评价以及介入性疼痛管理指南：第6部分。观察性研究的系统评价与荟萃分析
Pain Physician. 2009 Sep-Oct;12(5):819-50.

引用本文的文献

1
Validation of the Quality Assessment Tool for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Real-World Studies.真实世界研究系统评价和Meta分析质量评估工具的验证
J Evid Based Med. 2025 Jun;18(2):e70052. doi: 10.1111/jebm.70052.
2
Childhood maltreatment and problematic smartphone use: A multilevel, meta-analytic review.童年期虐待与问题智能手机使用：一项多层次的元分析综述
J Behav Addict. 2025 Jun 23;14(2):644-659. doi: 10.1556/2006.2025.00050. Print 2025 Jul 2.
3
Long-Term Outcomes of Rituximab Therapy in Autoimmune Hemolytic Anemia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.利妥昔单抗治疗自身免疫性溶血性贫血的长期结局：一项系统评价和荟萃分析。
Cureus. 2025 May 12;17(5):e83962. doi: 10.7759/cureus.83962. eCollection 2025 May.
4
The development and validation of Spatial Methodology Appraisal of Research Tool (SMART): a concept mapping study.研究工具空间方法评估（SMART）的开发与验证：一项概念图研究
Int J Health Geogr. 2025 May 31;24(1):14. doi: 10.1186/s12942-025-00401-1.
5
Harnessing nutrients and natural products for sustainable drug development against aging.利用营养物质和天然产物进行可持续的抗衰老药物研发。
Front Pharmacol. 2025 Apr 28;16:1579266. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2025.1579266. eCollection 2025.
6
Perioperative dexmedetomidine for the prevention of postoperative delirium after cardiac surgery: a systematic review, Bayesian meta-analysis, and Bayesian re-analysis of the DECADE trial.围手术期使用右美托咪定预防心脏手术后的术后谵妄：一项系统评价、贝叶斯荟萃分析以及对DECADE试验的贝叶斯再分析
Br J Anaesth. 2025 Jun;134(6):1671-1682. doi: 10.1016/j.bja.2025.02.031. Epub 2025 Apr 30.
7
SPIRIT 2025 explanation and elaboration: updated guideline for protocols of randomised trials.《SPIRIT 2025解释与阐述：随机试验方案更新指南》
BMJ. 2025 Apr 28;389:e081660. doi: 10.1136/bmj-2024-081660.
8
Development and Testing of the Protocol Quality Rating Tool (PQRT) to Evaluate Clinical Trial Protocol Document Quality.用于评估临床试验方案文件质量的方案质量评级工具（PQRT）的开发与测试
Clin Transl Sci. 2025 May;18(5):e70240. doi: 10.1111/cts.70240.
9
CONSORT 2025 explanation and elaboration: updated guideline for reporting randomised trials.CONSORT 2025解释与阐述：随机对照试验报告的更新指南
BMJ. 2025 Apr 14;389:e081124. doi: 10.1136/bmj-2024-081124.
10
Effects of psychosocial interventions on wellbeing in individuals with severe mental illness: a systematic review.心理社会干预对重症精神疾病患者幸福感的影响：一项系统综述。
Front Psychol. 2025 Mar 26;16:1574303. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1574303. eCollection 2025.

本文引用的文献

1
Factors relevant to the validity of experiments in social settings.与社会环境中实验有效性相关的因素。
Psychol Bull. 1957 Jul;54(4):297-312. doi: 10.1037/h0040950.
2
Systematic reviews in health care: Investigating and dealing with publication and other biases in meta-analysis.医疗保健中的系统评价：在荟萃分析中调查和处理发表偏倚及其他偏倚
BMJ. 2001 Jul 14;323(7304):101-5. doi: 10.1136/bmj.323.7304.101.
3
Physician interpretations and textbook definitions of blinding terminology in randomized controlled trials.医生对随机对照试验中盲法术语的解读及教科书定义
JAMA. 2001 Apr 18;285(15):2000-3. doi: 10.1001/jama.285.15.2000.
4
Value of flow diagrams in reports of randomized controlled trials.流程图在随机对照试验报告中的价值。
JAMA. 2001 Apr 18;285(15):1996-9. doi: 10.1001/jama.285.15.1996.
5
Use of the CONSORT statement and quality of reports of randomized trials: a comparative before-and-after evaluation.CONSORT声明的使用与随机试验报告的质量：一项前后对比评估
JAMA. 2001 Apr 18;285(15):1992-5. doi: 10.1001/jama.285.15.1992.
6
The hazards of scoring the quality of clinical trials for meta-analysis.对荟萃分析的临床试验质量进行评分的风险。
JAMA. 1999 Sep 15;282(11):1054-60. doi: 10.1001/jama.282.11.1054.
7
What is meant by intention to treat analysis? Survey of published randomised controlled trials.意向性分析是什么意思？已发表随机对照试验的调查。
BMJ. 1999 Sep 11;319(7211):670-4. doi: 10.1136/bmj.319.7211.670.
8
Antihypertensive drugs in very old people: a subgroup meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. INDANA Group.高龄老人的降压药物：随机对照试验的亚组荟萃分析。INDANA研究组。
Lancet. 1999 Mar 6;353(9155):793-6. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(98)08127-6.
9
Impact of study quality on outcome in placebo-controlled trials of homeopathy.顺势疗法安慰剂对照试验中研究质量对结果的影响。
J Clin Epidemiol. 1999 Jul;52(7):631-6. doi: 10.1016/s0895-4356(99)00048-7.
10
Assessing the quality of reports of randomised trials: implications for the conduct of meta-analyses.评估随机试验报告的质量：对荟萃分析实施的影响。
Health Technol Assess. 1999;3(12):i-iv, 1-98.