Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute of St Michael's Hospital, 209 Victoria Street, East Building, Room 716, Toronto, Ontario M5B 1W8, Canada.
Epidemiology Division, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, 155 College Street, 6th floor, Toronto, Ontario M5T 3M7, Canada.
J Clin Epidemiol. 2019 Feb;106:121-135. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2018.10.003. Epub 2018 Oct 9.
The aim of the article was to identify and summarize studies assessing methodologies for study selection, data abstraction, or quality appraisal in systematic reviews.
A systematic review was conducted, searching MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library from inception to September 1, 2016. Quality appraisal of included studies was undertaken using a modified Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2, and key results on accuracy, reliability, efficiency of a methodology, or impact on results and conclusions were extracted.
After screening 5,600 titles and abstracts and 245 full-text articles, 37 studies were included. For screening, studies supported the involvement of two independent experienced reviewers and the use of Google Translate when screening non-English articles. For data abstraction, studies supported involvement of experienced reviewers (especially for continuous outcomes) and two independent reviewers, use of dual monitors, graphical data extraction software, and contacting authors. For quality appraisal, studies supported intensive training, piloting quality assessment tools, providing decision rules for poorly reported studies, contacting authors, and using structured tools if different study designs are included.
Few studies exist documenting common systematic review practices. Included studies support several systematic review practices. These results provide an updated evidence-base for current knowledge synthesis guidelines and methods requiring further research.
本文旨在识别和总结评估系统评价中研究选择、数据提取或质量评估方法的研究。
系统检索了 MEDLINE、EMBASE 和 Cochrane Library 从建库至 2016 年 9 月 1 日的数据，采用改良的诊断准确性研究质量评估 2 对纳入研究进行质量评估，并提取了准确性、可靠性、方法学效率或对结果和结论的影响等关键结果。
经过筛选 5600 篇标题和摘要以及 245 篇全文文章，纳入了 37 项研究。对于筛选，研究支持两名独立经验丰富的评审员参与，并在筛选非英文文章时使用谷歌翻译。对于数据提取，研究支持有经验的评审员（特别是对于连续结果）和两名独立评审员的参与，使用双显示器、图形数据提取软件，并与作者联系。对于质量评估，研究支持密集培训、试用质量评估工具、为报道质量差的研究提供决策规则、与作者联系，并在包含不同研究设计时使用结构化工具。
很少有研究记录常见的系统评价实践。纳入的研究支持几种系统评价实践。这些结果为当前知识综合指南和方法提供了一个更新的证据基础，需要进一步研究。
