Suppr超能文献

使用系统评价与Meta分析的首选报告项目和系统评价中的偏倚风险工具对系统评价检索方法进行评估。

Systematic review search methods evaluated using the Preferred Reporting of Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses and the Risk Of Bias In Systematic reviews tool.

作者信息

de Kock Shelley, Stirk Lisa, Ross Janine, Duffy Steven, Noake Caro, Misso Kate

机构信息

Kleijnen Systematic Reviews Ltd, York, UK.

出版信息

Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2020 Dec 7;37:e18. doi: 10.1017/S0266462320002135.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the methodological and reporting characteristics of search methods of systematic reviews (SRs) using the Preferred Reporting of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist and the Risk Of Bias In Systematic reviews (ROBIS) tool.

METHODS

A sample of 505 SRs published in 2016 was taken from KSR Evidence, a database of SRs, and analyzed to assess compliance with Information sources and Search of the PRISMA checklist. Domain 2 (D2) (Identification and Selection of Studies) of the ROBIS tool was used to judge the risk of bias in search methods.

RESULTS

Regarding Information sources and Search of PRISMA, twenty percent of SRs which claimed to be PRISMA-compliant in their methods, were compliant; twenty-four percent of SRs published in journals that require PRISMA reporting were compliant; nineteen percent in total were found to be compliant. Twenty-eight percent of SRs were judged to be at a low risk of bias in D2 and so searched widely with an effective strategy and, finally, ten percent were both compliant with the reporting of Information sources and with Search of PRISMA and were judged to be at a low risk of bias in D2.

CONCLUSIONS

Ninety percent of SRs are failing to report search methods adequately and to conduct comprehensive searches using a wide range of resources. Editors of journals and peer reviewers need to ensure that they understand the requirements of PRISMA and that compliance is adhered to. Additionally, the comprehensiveness of search methods for SRs needs to be given more critical consideration.

摘要

目的

使用系统评价与Meta分析的首选报告规范(PRISMA)清单和系统评价中的偏倚风险(ROBIS)工具,评估系统评价(SR)检索方法的方法学和报告特征。

方法

从系统评价数据库KSR Evidence中选取2016年发表的505篇系统评价作为样本,分析其是否符合PRISMA清单中的信息来源和检索部分。使用ROBIS工具的第2领域(D2)(研究的识别与选择)来判断检索方法中的偏倚风险。

结果

关于PRISMA的信息来源和检索部分,在方法上声称符合PRISMA规范的系统评价中,20%实际符合规范;在要求PRISMA报告的期刊上发表的系统评价中,24%符合规范;总体而言,19%符合规范。28%的系统评价在D2中被判定为低偏倚风险,因此采用有效策略进行了广泛检索,最后,10%既符合信息来源报告和PRISMA检索要求,又在D2中被判定为低偏倚风险。

结论

90%的系统评价未能充分报告检索方法,也未使用广泛资源进行全面检索。期刊编辑和同行评审人员需要确保他们理解PRISMA的要求并遵守合规性。此外,需要更严格地考虑系统评价检索方法的全面性。

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