系统评价和荟萃分析中护理干预慢性阻塞性肺疾病的报告和方法学质量 - 系统评价。
The reporting and methodological quality of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of nursing interventions for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease - A systematic review.
机构信息
Department of Science and Education, Zibo Municipal Hospital, Zibo, China.
Department of Standardization Management, Zibo Municipal Hospital, Zibo, China.
出版信息
Nurs Open. 2021 May;8(3):1489-1500. doi: 10.1002/nop2.767. Epub 2021 Jan 19.
AIMS
The aim of this review was to evaluate the reporting and methodological quality of systematic reviews and meta-analyses (SRs/MAs) on nursing interventions in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and to determine potential factors that predict high quality.
DESIGN
The review is a quantitative systematic review.
DATA SOURCES
PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews.
REVIEW METHODS
A comprehensive literature search was conducted in three databases for SRs/MAs published up to 6 May 2020. The PRISMA statement and AMSTAR checklist were used to evaluate the reporting and methodological quality.
RESULTS
A total of 130 articles published between 1996-2020 from 69 journals were included in this review. Multivariate regression analyses demonstrated that the following factors were related to the higher reporting quality of included articles: having a protocol or registration and being published on the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Systematic reviews including meta-analyses, number of authors >5, number of pages and having protocol or registration were related to higher methodological quality. A strong linear correlation (r = 0.860) was detected between the scores of PRISMA and AMSTAR.
CONCLUSION
A significant number of systematic reviews and meta-analyses on nursing interventions in patients with COPD show suboptimal reporting and poor methodology quality. The use of PRISMA and AMSTAR guidelines in conducting, reading, reviewing and editing systematic reviews and meta-analyses is recommended to improve the quality of systematic reviews and meta-analyses.
IMPACT
The findings of this review can provide references for health workers and health policy makers to evaluate and apply evidence-based knowledge. Additionally, such high-quality systematic reviews/meta-analyses can guide medical and health practice.
目的
本综述旨在评估慢性阻塞性肺疾病（COPD）患者护理干预措施的系统评价和荟萃分析（SR/MAs）的报告和方法学质量，并确定预测高质量的潜在因素。
设计
本综述为定量系统评价。
资料来源
PubMed、Embase 和 Cochrane 系统评价数据库。
综述方法
在三个数据库中全面检索截至 2020 年 5 月 6 日发表的 SR/MAs 文献。采用 PRISMA 声明和 AMSTAR 清单评估报告和方法学质量。
结果
本综述共纳入 69 种期刊发表的 1996 年至 2020 年间的 130 篇文章。多变量回归分析表明，以下因素与纳入文章的较高报告质量相关：有方案或注册以及发表在 Cochrane 系统评价数据库上。包含荟萃分析、作者人数＞5、页数和方案或注册的系统评价与较高的方法学质量相关。PRISMA 和 AMSTAR 的评分之间存在很强的线性相关性（r=0.860）。
结论
大量 COPD 患者护理干预措施的系统评价和荟萃分析显示报告和方法学质量欠佳。建议在进行、阅读、评价和编辑系统评价和荟萃分析时使用 PRISMA 和 AMSTAR 指南，以提高系统评价和荟萃分析的质量。
影响
本综述的结果可以为卫生工作者和卫生政策制定者提供参考，以评估和应用循证知识。此外，高质量的系统评价/荟萃分析可以指导医疗保健实践。
Zotero 插件