• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
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
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
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 @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

对系统评价和荟萃分析报告指南进行映射,为未来的报告指南生成了一个全面的项目库。

Mapping of reporting guidance for systematic reviews and meta-analyses generated a comprehensive item bank for future reporting guidelines.

机构信息

School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.

School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.

出版信息

J Clin Epidemiol. 2020 Feb;118:60-68. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2019.11.010. Epub 2019 Nov 15.

DOI:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2019.11.010
PMID:31740319
Abstract

OBJECTIVES

The aim of the study was to generate a comprehensive bank of systematic review (SR) reporting items to inform an update of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2009 statement.

METHODS

We searched the Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research Network library in May 2019 to identify all reporting guidelines for SRs that were published after 2009, regardless of the scope of the guideline. We also conducted a selective review of four guidance manuals for SRs, three tools for assessing the risk of bias in SRs, six meta-research studies evaluating the reporting quality of SRs using a tailored checklist, and five reporting guidelines for other study designs. One author screened and selected sources for inclusion, extracted reporting guidance from sources, and mapped guidance against the PRISMA 2009 checklist items.

RESULTS

We included 60 sources providing guidance on reporting of SRs and meta-analyses. From these, we collated a list of 221 unique reporting items. Items were categorized into title (four items), abstract (10 items), introduction (12 items), methods (111 items), results (61 items), discussion (12 items), funding and conflicts of interest (four items), administrative information (three items), and data availability (four items). This exercise generated 175 reporting items that could be added to the guidance in the PRISMA 2009 statement.

CONCLUSION

Generation of a comprehensive item bank through review and mapping of the literature facilitates identification of missing items and those needing modification, which may not otherwise be identified by the guideline development team or from other activities commonly used to develop reporting guidelines.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在生成一套全面的系统评价(SR)报告条目,为更新 2009 年《系统评价和荟萃分析的首选报告项目》(PRISMA)提供信息。

方法

我们于 2019 年 5 月在增强健康研究网络文库中检索了所有 2009 年后发布的针对 SR 的报告指南,无论指南的范围如何。我们还对 4 种 SR 指导手册、3 种用于评估 SR 偏倚风险的工具、6 项使用定制清单评估 SR 报告质量的元研究、以及 5 种其他研究设计的报告指南进行了选择性综述。一位作者筛选并选择纳入的来源,从来源中提取报告指导,并将指导与 PRISMA 2009 清单项目进行映射。

结果

我们纳入了 60 篇提供 SR 和荟萃分析报告指导的来源。从中,我们整理出 221 个独特的报告条目列表。条目分为标题(4 项)、摘要(10 项)、引言(12 项)、方法(111 项)、结果(61 项)、讨论(12 项)、资金和利益冲突(4 项)、行政信息(3 项)和数据可用性(4 项)。这项工作产生了 175 个报告条目,可以添加到 PRISMA 2009 声明中的指导中。

结论

通过对文献的回顾和映射生成全面的条目库,有助于确定遗漏的条目和需要修改的条目,而这些条目可能无法通过指南制定小组或其他常用于制定报告指南的活动来识别。

相似文献

1
Mapping of reporting guidance for systematic reviews and meta-analyses generated a comprehensive item bank for future reporting guidelines.对系统评价和荟萃分析报告指南进行映射,为未来的报告指南生成了一个全面的项目库。
J Clin Epidemiol. 2020 Feb;118:60-68. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2019.11.010. Epub 2019 Nov 15.
2
Evaluations of the uptake and impact of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Statement and extensions: a scoping review.评价系统评价和荟萃分析首选报告项目(PRISMA)声明及其扩展的采用和影响:范围综述。
Syst Rev. 2017 Dec 19;6(1):263. doi: 10.1186/s13643-017-0663-8.
3
Preferred Reporting Items for a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies: The PRISMA-DTA Statement.诊断测试准确性研究的系统评价和荟萃分析的首选报告项目:PRISMA-DTA 声明。
JAMA. 2018 Jan 23;319(4):388-396. doi: 10.1001/jama.2017.19163.
4
Exploring reporting quality of systematic reviews and Meta-analyses on nursing interventions in patients with Alzheimer's disease before and after PRISMA introduction.探讨 PRISMA 引入前后针对阿尔茨海默病患者的护理干预的系统评价和 Meta 分析的报告质量。
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2018 Nov 29;18(1):154. doi: 10.1186/s12874-018-0622-7.
5
Reporting and Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Nursing Interventions in Patients With Alzheimer's Disease: General Implications of the Findings.阿尔茨海默病患者护理干预的系统评价和荟萃分析的报告和方法学质量:研究结果的普遍意义。
J Nurs Scholarsh. 2019 May;51(3):308-316. doi: 10.1111/jnu.12462. Epub 2019 Feb 25.
6
Endorsement of PRISMA statement and quality of systematic reviews and meta-analyses published in nursing journals: a cross-sectional study.护理期刊发表的系统评价和荟萃分析对PRISMA声明的认可情况及质量:一项横断面研究
BMJ Open. 2017 Feb 7;7(2):e013905. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-013905.
7
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses of individual participant data: the PRISMA-IPD Statement.个体参与者数据系统评价和荟萃分析的首选报告项目:PRISMA-IPD 声明。
JAMA. 2015 Apr 28;313(16):1657-65. doi: 10.1001/jama.2015.3656.
8
The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews.PRISMA 2020 声明:系统评价报告的更新指南。
Int J Surg. 2021 Apr;88:105906. doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2021.105906. Epub 2021 Mar 29.
9
Abstract analysis method facilitates filtering low-methodological quality and high-bias risk systematic reviews on psoriasis interventions.摘要分析方法有助于筛选银屑病干预措施中方法学质量低和偏倚风险高的系统评价。
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2017 Dec 29;17(1):180. doi: 10.1186/s12874-017-0460-z.
10
Reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses of acupuncture: the PRISMA for acupuncture checklist.针灸系统评价和荟萃分析报告条目:针灸 PRISMA 清单。
BMC Complement Altern Med. 2019 Aug 12;19(1):208. doi: 10.1186/s12906-019-2624-3.

引用本文的文献

1
Longitudinal changes in skeletal muscle in children undergoing cancer treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis.接受癌症治疗儿童骨骼肌的纵向变化:一项系统评价和荟萃分析。
Eur J Pediatr. 2025 Jul 31;184(8):513. doi: 10.1007/s00431-025-06349-5.
2
Health promotion theory-based educational interventions for improving oral health in children and adolescents: a systematic review and meta-analysis.基于健康促进理论的儿童和青少年口腔健康改善教育干预措施:系统评价与荟萃分析
BMC Oral Health. 2025 Jul 13;25(1):1153. doi: 10.1186/s12903-025-06549-3.
3
A comprehensive item bank of internal validity issues of relevance to in vitro toxicology studies.
与体外毒理学研究相关的内部有效性问题综合题库。
Evid Based Toxicol. 2024;2(1):2418045. doi: 10.1080/2833373X.2024.2418045. Epub 2024 Oct 31.
4
Diagnostic imaging confusion in infectious spondylitis.感染性脊柱炎的诊断性影像学混淆
J Orthop Surg Res. 2025 May 21;20(1):496. doi: 10.1186/s13018-025-05781-5.
5
Bone mineral density in childhood cancer survivors during and after oncological treatment: A systematic review and meta-analysis.肿瘤治疗期间及之后儿童癌症幸存者的骨矿物质密度:一项系统评价与荟萃分析。
Osteoporos Int. 2025 May;36(5):767-777. doi: 10.1007/s00198-025-07458-5. Epub 2025 Mar 27.
6
Biomarkers for cognitive impairment in alpha-synucleinopathies: an overview of systematic reviews and meta-analyses.α-突触核蛋白病认知障碍的生物标志物:系统评价和荟萃分析综述
NPJ Parkinsons Dis. 2024 Nov 2;10(1):211. doi: 10.1038/s41531-024-00823-x.
7
The Effectiveness of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy on Depression and Anxiety Symptoms in Breast Cancer Patients and Survivors: A Systematic Review of Interventional Studies.认知行为疗法对乳腺癌患者和幸存者抑郁和焦虑症状的有效性:干预性研究的系统评价。
Brain Behav. 2024 Oct;14(10):e70098. doi: 10.1002/brb3.70098.
8
Association of RAP Compensatory Reserve Index with Continuous Multimodal Monitoring Cerebral Physiology, Neuroimaging, and Patient Outcome in Adult Acute Traumatic Neural Injury: A Scoping Review.RAP代偿储备指数与成人急性创伤性神经损伤中连续多模态监测脑生理学、神经影像学及患者预后的关联:一项综述。
Neurotrauma Rep. 2024 Sep 13;5(1):813-823. doi: 10.1089/neur.2024.0058. eCollection 2024.
9
Impact of water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) interventions on gender-specific school attendance and learning outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis protocol.水、环境卫生与个人卫生(WASH)干预措施对特定性别的学校出勤率和学习成果的影响:一项系统评价和荟萃分析方案
PLoS One. 2024 Aug 1;19(8):e0308144. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0308144. eCollection 2024.
10
Identifying assessment criteria for in vitro studies: a method and item bank.确定体外研究的评估标准:一种方法和项目库。
Toxicol Sci. 2024 Oct 1;201(2):240-253. doi: 10.1093/toxsci/kfae083.