Mullen Patricia Dolan, Ramírez Gilbert
Center for Health Promotion and Prevention Research, School of Public Health, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Texas 77030, USA.
Annu Rev Public Health. 2006;27:81-102. doi: 10.1146/annurev.publhealth.27.021405.102239.
The systematic review "movement" that has transformed medical journal reports of clinical trials and reviews of clinical trials has taken hold in public health, with the most recent milestone, the publication of the first edition of The Guide to Community Health Services in 2005. In this paper we define and distinguish current terms, point out important resources for systematic reviews, describe the impact of systematic review on the quality of primary studies and summaries of the evidence, and provide perspectives on the promise of systematic reviews for shaping the agenda for public health research. Several pitfalls are discussed, including a false sense of rigor implied by the terms "systematic review" and "meta-analysis" and substantial variation in the validity of claims that a particular intervention is "evidence based," and the difficulty of translating conclusions from systematic reviews into public health advocacy and practice.
这种改变了医学期刊临床试验报告及临床试验综述的系统性综述“潮流”已在公共卫生领域扎根，最近的一个里程碑是2005年《社区卫生服务指南》第一版的出版。在本文中，我们定义并区分了当前的术语，指出了系统性综述的重要资源，描述了系统性综述对原始研究质量和证据总结的影响，并就系统性综述在塑造公共卫生研究议程方面的前景提供了观点。文中讨论了几个陷阱，包括“系统性综述”和“荟萃分析”这两个术语所隐含的一种虚假的严谨感，以及关于特定干预措施是“循证”的说法在有效性上的巨大差异，还有将系统性综述的结论转化为公共卫生宣传和实践的困难。
