Cote Mark P, Apostolakos John M, Voss Andreas, DiVenere Jessica, Arciero Robert A, Mazzocca Augustus D
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Connecticut, Farmington, Connecticut, U.S.A..
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Connecticut, Farmington, Connecticut, U.S.A.
Arthroscopy. 2016 Mar;32(3):528-37. doi: 10.1016/j.arthro.2015.08.002. Epub 2015 Oct 4.
To determine whether the number of meta-analyses published by Arthroscopy: The Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery has increased from the inception of the Journal through 2014.
A literature search of the Journal's Web site and Medline was carried out. All studies described as a "meta-analysis" as well as systematic reviews that pooled data were included. The number of published meta-analyses was calculated and summarized by year of publication, region, topic, and level of evidence.
The Journal's Web site search resulted in 517 citations for review, and the Medline search resulted in 400. After the results of each search were combined and duplicates were removed, a total of 60 studies were included in this review. The first published meta-analysis appeared in 2001. Of the 60 meta-analyses, 36 (60%) were published between 2013 and 2014. In light of the increase in the number of publications, a review of the design and conduct of a meta-analysis is presented in a straightforward question-and-answer format.
The number of meta-analyses appearing in Arthroscopy has increased over the past 2 decades. This increase highlights the importance of developing an understanding of the premise and components of a meta-analysis to allow the reader to critically appraise these studies.
Level IV, systematic review of Level I through IV meta-analyses.
确定《关节镜检查：关节镜及相关外科杂志》自创刊至2014年发表的荟萃分析数量是否有所增加。
对该杂志网站和医学数据库进行文献检索。纳入所有描述为“荟萃分析”以及汇总数据的系统评价。已发表的荟萃分析数量按发表年份、地区、主题和证据水平进行计算和汇总。
该杂志网站检索得到517条待审查引文，医学数据库检索得到400条。将每次检索结果合并并去除重复项后，本综述共纳入60项研究。第一篇发表的荟萃分析出现在2001年。在这60项荟萃分析中，36项（60%）发表于2013年至2014年期间。鉴于发表数量的增加，本文以直接的问答形式对荟萃分析的设计和实施进行了综述。
在过去20年中，发表在《关节镜检查》上的荟萃分析数量有所增加。这一增长凸显了理解荟萃分析的前提和组成部分的重要性，以便读者能够批判性地评估这些研究。
IV级，对I级至IV级荟萃分析的系统评价。
