Unit of Periodontology, International Centre for Evidence-Based Oral Health, University College London Eastman Dental Institute, London, England.
J Am Dent Assoc. 2013 May;144(5):527-30. doi: 10.14219/jada.archive.2013.0155.
and overview. This article describes the different types of reviews of research that are available in the literature: systematic reviews and traditional reviews. Systematic reviews have become the reference standard for evidence to inform clinical practice. In this article, the authors set out guidance on appraising the quality and relevance of systematic reviews to help readers make decisions about their clinical practice.
and practical implications. Systematic reviews are of variable quality, although evaluations of reviews by the Cochrane Collaboration generally are of the highest quality. An assessment tool described in this article appears currently to be the most useful tool to guide clinicians to assess systematic reviews and therefore to decide whether the evidence is appropriate to change practice.
概述。本文介绍了文献中可获得的不同类型的研究综述:系统综述和传统综述。系统综述已成为为指导临床实践提供证据的参考标准。在本文中,作者提出了评估系统综述质量和相关性的指南,以帮助读者做出关于其临床实践的决策。
实际意义。系统综述的质量参差不齐,尽管 Cochrane 协作组织对综述的评估通常质量最高。本文描述的评估工具似乎是目前最有用的工具,可以指导临床医生评估系统综述,从而决定证据是否适合改变实践。