Institute of Research and Development, Duy Tan University, Danang 550000, Vietnam.
Online Research Club (http://www.onlineresearchclub.org/), Nagasaki, Japan; Faculty of Medicine, Vo Truong Toan University, Hau Giang, Vietnam.
J Clin Epidemiol. 2020 Mar;119:26-35. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2019.11.009. Epub 2019 Nov 15.
Our study aimed to systematically assess and report the methodological quality used in epidemiological systematic reviews (SRs) and meta-analysis (MA) of pathogen genotypes/genogroups.
Nine electronic databases and manual search of reference lists were used to identify relevant studies. The method types were divided into three groups: 1) with weighted pooling analysis (which we call MA), (2) unweighted analysis of the study-level measures (which we call summary statistics), and (3) without any data pooling (which we call SR only). Characteristics were evaluated using Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR), Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA), and Risk Of Bias In Systematic reviews (ROBIS) tools. The protocol was registered in PROSPERO with CRD42017078146.
Among 36 included articles, 5 (14%) studies conducted SR only, 16 (44%) performed MA, and 15 (42%) used summary statistics. The univariable and multivariable linear regression of AMSTAR and PRISMA scores showed that MA had higher quality compared with those with summary statistics. The SR only and summary statistics groups had approximately equal scores among three scales of AMSTAR, PRISMA, and ROBIS. The methodological quality of epidemiological studies has improved from 1999 to 2017.
Despite the frequent use of unweighted summary statistics, MA remains the most suitable method for reaching rational conclusions in epidemiological studies of pathogen genotypes/genogroups.
本研究旨在系统评估和报告病原体基因型/基因群的流行病学系统评价（SR）和荟萃分析（MA）中使用的方法学质量。
使用 9 个电子数据库和参考文献列表的手动搜索来识别相关研究。方法类型分为三组：1）具有加权汇总分析（我们称之为 MA），2）研究水平测量的非加权分析（我们称之为汇总统计），3）没有任何数据汇总（我们称之为仅 SR）。使用评估多个系统评价（AMSTAR）、系统评价和荟萃分析的首选报告项目（PRISMA）以及系统评价中的偏倚风险（ROBIS）工具评估特征。该方案在 PROSPERO 中以 CRD42017078146 进行了注册。
在 36 篇纳入的文章中，有 5 篇（14%）进行了仅 SR，16 篇（44%）进行了 MA，15 篇（42%）使用了汇总统计。AMSTAR 和 PRISMA 评分的单变量和多变量线性回归显示，MA 与汇总统计相比具有更高的质量。仅 SR 和汇总统计组在 AMSTAR、PRISMA 和 ROBIS 的三个量表中得分大致相等。病原体基因型/基因群的流行病学研究的方法学质量已从 1999 年提高到 2017 年。
尽管经常使用非加权汇总统计，但 MA 仍然是在病原体基因型/基因群的流行病学研究中得出合理结论的最适合方法。
