文献检索文档翻译深度研究
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
邀请有礼套餐&价格历史记录

新学期,新优惠

限时优惠:9月1日-9月22日

30天高级会员仅需29元

1天体验卡首发特惠仅需5.99元

了解详情
不再提醒
插件&应用
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
高级版
套餐订阅购买积分包
AI 工具
文献检索文档翻译深度研究
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 @ 2025

GRADE 指南:5. 评估证据质量——发表偏倚。

GRADE guidelines: 5. Rating the quality of evidence--publication bias.

机构信息

Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario L8N 3Z5, Canada.

出版信息

J Clin Epidemiol. 2011 Dec;64(12):1277-82. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2011.01.011. Epub 2011 Jul 30.


DOI:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2011.01.011
PMID:21802904
Abstract

In the GRADE approach, randomized trials start as high-quality evidence and observational studies as low-quality evidence, but both can be rated down if a body of evidence is associated with a high risk of publication bias. Even when individual studies included in best-evidence summaries have a low risk of bias, publication bias can result in substantial overestimates of effect. Authors should suspect publication bias when available evidence comes from a number of small studies, most of which have been commercially funded. A number of approaches based on examination of the pattern of data are available to help assess publication bias. The most popular of these is the funnel plot; all, however, have substantial limitations. Publication bias is likely frequent, and caution in the face of early results, particularly with small sample size and number of events, is warranted.

摘要

在 GRADE 方法中,随机试验最初被视为高质量证据,而观察性研究则被视为低质量证据,但如果证据体与高发表偏倚风险相关,则两者都可能被降级。即使最佳证据汇总中包含的个别研究的偏倚风险较低,发表偏倚也可能导致效果的大幅高估。当现有证据来自多项小型研究,且其中大多数都有商业资助时,作者应怀疑存在发表偏倚。有多种基于数据模式检查的方法可用于帮助评估发表偏倚。其中最受欢迎的是漏斗图;然而,所有这些方法都有很大的局限性。发表偏倚很可能很常见,因此对于早期结果,特别是对于小样本量和事件数量,应保持谨慎。

相似文献

[1]
GRADE guidelines: 5. Rating the quality of evidence--publication bias.

J Clin Epidemiol. 2011-7-30

[2]
[GRADE guidelines: 5. Rating the quality of evidence: publication bias].

Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes. 2012

[3]
GRADE guidelines: 4. Rating the quality of evidence--study limitations (risk of bias).

J Clin Epidemiol. 2011-1-19

[4]
Evidence-based medicine, systematic reviews, and guidelines in interventional pain management: part 6. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of observational studies.

Pain Physician. 2009

[5]
GRADE guidelines: 8. Rating the quality of evidence--indirectness.

J Clin Epidemiol. 2011-7-30

[6]
Synthesis, grading, and presentation of evidence in guidelines: article 7 in Integrating and coordinating efforts in COPD guideline development. An official ATS/ERS workshop report.

Proc Am Thorac Soc. 2012-12

[7]
Capture-recapture is a potentially useful method for assessing publication bias.

J Clin Epidemiol. 2004-4

[8]
Bias in clinical intervention research.

Am J Epidemiol. 2006-3-15

[9]
[GRADE guidelines: 3. Rating the quality of evidence (confidence in the estimates of effect)].

Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes. 2012

[10]
Evidence-based oral and maxillofacial surgery: some pitfalls and limitations.

J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2011-1

引用本文的文献

[1]
Bile acids for metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease in adults.

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2025-9-2

[2]
Characterization and risk stratification of coronary artery disease in people living with HIV: a global systematic review.

Front Cardiovasc Med. 2025-8-12

[3]
Effectiveness of Psychological Therapy for Treatment-Resistant Depression in Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

J Pers Med. 2025-8-1

[4]
European Society of Intensive Care Medicine Clinical Practice Guideline on fluid therapy in adult critically ill patients: Part 3-fluid removal at de-escalation phase.

Intensive Care Med. 2025-8-19

[5]
The effects of vivifrail-based multicomponent training on physical and cognitive function in frail older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Front Physiol. 2025-7-29

[6]
Shorter versus longer-duration antibiotic treatments for immunocompetent patients with bloodstream infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

EClinicalMedicine. 2025-7-31

[7]
Safety and effectiveness of opioid use in adult patients presenting to emergency services with suspected acute appendicitis: a protocol for a systematic review of the literature and network meta-analysis.

BMJ Open. 2025-8-10

[8]
Multipronged biobehavioural intervention strategies for prevention and control of hypertension: A protocol for systematic review of education-based community trials.

MethodsX. 2025-7-7

[9]
Effectiveness of mindfulness-based interventions on inflammaging: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Biogerontology. 2025-7-18

[10]
Effectiveness of anabolic and anti-resorptive agents for preventing postmenopausal osteoporosis fractures: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

J Orthop Surg Res. 2025-7-12

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

推荐工具

医学文档翻译智能文献检索