Rosenfeld Richard M
SUNY Health Science Center at Brooklyn, and Long Island College Hospital, Brooklyn, NY 11201, USA.
ORL J Otorhinolaryngol Relat Spec. 2004 Jul-Aug;66(4):186-95. doi: 10.1159/000079876.
Systematic reviews use explicit and reproducible criteria to assemble, appraise, and combine articles with a minimum of bias. Meta-analysis is a form of systematic review that uses statistical techniques to derive quantitative estimates of the magnitude of treatment effects and their associated precision. Valid meta-analyses address focused questions, use appropriate criteria to select articles, assess the quality and combinability of articles, provide graphic and numeric summaries, consider potential biases, and can be generalized to a meaningful target population. The rate difference, or absolute risk reduction, is the preferred measure of clinical effect size; the reciprocal tells the number needed to treat for one additional favorable outcome. The benefits of meta-analysis over individual trials include greater precision, increased statistical power, and the ability to identify and explore diversity among studies. Threats to validity include heterogeneity, citation bias, publication bias, language bias, and variations in study quality. Because meta-analysis defines rational treatment expectations at a population level, it is an adjunct to, not a substitute for, clinical judgment in the care of individual patients.
系统评价使用明确且可重复的标准来收集、评估和合并文章,以尽量减少偏倚。荟萃分析是系统评价的一种形式,它使用统计技术来得出治疗效果大小及其相关精确度的定量估计。有效的荟萃分析解决重点问题,使用适当标准选择文章,评估文章的质量和可合并性,提供图表和数值总结,考虑潜在偏倚,并且可以推广到有意义的目标人群。率差或绝对风险降低是临床效应大小的首选衡量指标;其倒数表示为获得一个额外的有利结果所需治疗的人数。荟萃分析相对于单个试验的优势包括更高的精确度、更强的统计效力以及识别和探究研究间差异的能力。对有效性的威胁包括异质性、引用偏倚、发表偏倚、语言偏倚以及研究质量的差异。由于荟萃分析在群体层面定义了合理的治疗预期,因此它是个体患者护理中临床判断的辅助手段,而非替代品。