• 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

将复合质量评分(CQS)扩展为前瞻性、对照临床治疗试验的评估工具——荟萃流行病学证据的系统评价。

Extension of the Composite Quality Score (CQS) as an appraisal tool for prospective, controlled clinical therapy trials-A systematic review of meta-epidemiological evidence.

机构信息

Faculty of Dentistry, University of the Western Cape, Tygerberg, Cape Town, South Africa.

Department of Community Dentistry, School of Oral Health Sciences, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Parktown, Johannesburg, South Africa.

出版信息

PLoS One. 2022 Dec 30;17(12):e0279645. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0279645. eCollection 2022.

DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0279645
PMID:36584067
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9803107/
Abstract

AIM

To conduct a survey of current meta-epidemiological studies to identify additional trial design characteristics that may be associated with significant over- or underestimation of the treatment effect and to use such identified characteristics as a basis for the formulation of new CQS appraisal criteria.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrieved eligible studies from two systematic reviews on this topic (latest search May 2015) and searched the databases PubMed and Embase for further studies from June 2015 -March 2022. All data were extracted by one author and verified by another. Sufficiently homogeneous estimates from single studies were pooled using random-effects meta-analysis. Trial design characteristics associated with statistically significant estimates from single datasets (which could not be pooled) and meta-analyses were used as a basis to formulate new or amend existing CQS criteria.

RESULTS

A total of 38 meta-epidemiological studies were identified. From these, seven trial design characteristics associated with statistically significant over- or underestimation of the true therapeutic effect were found.

CONCLUSION

One new criterion concerning double-blinding was added to the CQS, and the original criteria for concealing the random allocation sequence and for minimum sample size were amended.

摘要

目的

对当前的荟萃流行病学研究进行调查,以确定可能与治疗效果过高或过低估计相关的其他试验设计特征,并将这些确定的特征作为制定新的 CQS 评估标准的基础。

材料和方法

我们从关于这个主题的两项系统评价中检索了合格的研究(最新检索日期为 2015 年 5 月),并从 2015 年 6 月至 2022 年 3 月在 PubMed 和 Embase 数据库中搜索了其他研究。所有数据均由一名作者提取,另一名作者进行验证。来自单个研究的足够同质的估计值使用随机效应荟萃分析进行了汇总。将与单个数据集(无法汇总)和荟萃分析的统计学显著估计值相关的试验设计特征作为制定新的或修订现有的 CQS 标准的基础。

结果

共确定了 38 项荟萃流行病学研究。从中发现了 7 个与治疗效果的真实估计过高或过低显著相关的试验设计特征。

结论

在 CQS 中增加了一个关于双盲的新标准,并修订了原始的随机分组序列隐藏和最小样本量标准。

相似文献

1
Extension of the Composite Quality Score (CQS) as an appraisal tool for prospective, controlled clinical therapy trials-A systematic review of meta-epidemiological evidence.将复合质量评分(CQS)扩展为前瞻性、对照临床治疗试验的评估工具——荟萃流行病学证据的系统评价。
PLoS One. 2022 Dec 30;17(12):e0279645. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0279645. eCollection 2022.
2
Folic acid supplementation and malaria susceptibility and severity among people taking antifolate antimalarial drugs in endemic areas.在流行地区,服用抗叶酸抗疟药物的人群中,叶酸补充剂与疟疾易感性和严重程度的关系。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Feb 1;2(2022):CD014217. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD014217.
3
Allocation concealment appraisal of clinical therapy trials using the extended Composite Quality Score (CQS-2)-An empirically based update.使用扩展综合质量评分(CQS-2)对临床治疗试验的分配隐藏评估——基于实证的更新
Front Med (Lausanne). 2023 Jun 15;10:1176219. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2023.1176219. eCollection 2023.
4
Application of the Composite Quality Score (CQS-2B) versus Cochrane's Risk of Bias tool (Version 2) in systematic reviews of clinical trials - an exploratory study.复合质量评分(CQS - 2B)与Cochrane偏倚风险工具(第2版)在临床试验系统评价中的应用——一项探索性研究。
Front Med (Lausanne). 2024 May 2;11:1307815. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2024.1307815. eCollection 2024.
5
Trial characteristics and treatment effect estimates in randomized controlled trials of Chinese herbal medicine: A meta-epidemiological study.中药随机对照试验的试验特征和治疗效果估计:一项meta 流行病学研究。
J Integr Med. 2024 May;22(3):223-234. doi: 10.1016/j.joim.2024.04.003. Epub 2024 Apr 23.
6
The future of Cochrane Neonatal.考克兰新生儿协作网的未来。
Early Hum Dev. 2020 Nov;150:105191. doi: 10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2020.105191. Epub 2020 Sep 12.
7
Consolidated standards of reporting trials (CONSORT) and the completeness of reporting of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published in medical journals.试验报告的统一标准(CONSORT)以及医学期刊上发表的随机对照试验(RCT)的报告完整性。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012 Nov 14;11(11):MR000030. doi: 10.1002/14651858.MR000030.pub2.
8
Trial-level characteristics associate with treatment effect estimates: a systematic review of meta-epidemiological studies.试验水平特征与治疗效果估计相关:荟萃流行病学研究的系统评价。
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2022 Jun 15;22(1):171. doi: 10.1186/s12874-022-01650-5.
9
Inter-rater reliability of the extended Composite Quality Score (CQS-2).扩展综合质量评分(CQS-2)的评分者间信度。
Front Med (Lausanne). 2023 Aug 17;10:1201517. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2023.1201517. eCollection 2023.
10

引用本文的文献

1
The Limits of Inductive Reasoning for Clinical Evidence Appraisal: A Simulation Study.临床证据评估中归纳推理的局限性:一项模拟研究。
Cureus. 2025 Jan 6;17(1):e77047. doi: 10.7759/cureus.77047. eCollection 2025 Jan.
2
Trial-Adjusted Versus Generic Simulated Comparator Trial (SCT) Settings for Selection Bias Appraisal Using the I2 Test.使用I2检验评估选择偏倚时的试验调整与通用模拟对照试验(SCT)设置
Cureus. 2024 Oct 16;16(10):e71668. doi: 10.7759/cureus.71668. eCollection 2024 Oct.
3
The I2 Test for Selection Bias Risk Assessment in Single Trials: Recommended Simulated Comparator Trial (SCT) Settings.

本文引用的文献

1
The Composite Quality Score (CQS) as an Appraisal Tool for Prospective, Controlled Clinical Therapy Trials: Rationale and Current Evidence.作为前瞻性对照临床治疗试验评估工具的综合质量评分(CQS):基本原理与现有证据
Rev Recent Clin Trials. 2023;18(1):28-33. doi: 10.2174/1574887118666230104152245.
2
The Composite Quality Score (CQS) as a trial appraisal tool: inter-rater reliability and rating time.复合质量评分(CQS)作为一种试用评估工具:评分者间信度和评分时间。
Clin Oral Investig. 2021 Oct;25(10):6015-6023. doi: 10.1007/s00784-021-04099-w. Epub 2021 Aug 11.
3
Association Between Lack of Blinding and Mortality Results in Critical Care Randomized Controlled Trials: A Meta-Epidemiological Study.
单试验中选择偏倚风险评估的I2检验:推荐的模拟对照试验(SCT)设置。
Cureus. 2024 Sep 7;16(9):e68911. doi: 10.7759/cureus.68911. eCollection 2024 Sep.
4
Selection Bias Risk in Randomized Controlled Trials Rated as Low Bias Using Risk of Bias, Version 2 (RoB2) Tool.使用偏倚风险第2版(RoB2)工具评定为低偏倚的随机对照试验中的选择偏倚风险
Cureus. 2024 Jul 1;16(7):e63581. doi: 10.7759/cureus.63581. eCollection 2024 Jul.
5
Application of the Composite Quality Score (CQS-2B) versus Cochrane's Risk of Bias tool (Version 2) in systematic reviews of clinical trials - an exploratory study.复合质量评分(CQS - 2B)与Cochrane偏倚风险工具(第2版)在临床试验系统评价中的应用——一项探索性研究。
Front Med (Lausanne). 2024 May 2;11:1307815. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2024.1307815. eCollection 2024.
6
Inter-rater reliability of the extended Composite Quality Score (CQS-2).扩展综合质量评分(CQS-2)的评分者间信度。
Front Med (Lausanne). 2023 Aug 17;10:1201517. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2023.1201517. eCollection 2023.
7
The composite quality score for the appraisal of prospective controlled clinical therapy trials in systematic reviews and its limits.系统评价中前瞻性对照临床治疗试验评估的综合质量评分及其局限性。
Front Med (Lausanne). 2023 Jun 28;10:1201951. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2023.1201951. eCollection 2023.
8
Allocation concealment appraisal of clinical therapy trials using the extended Composite Quality Score (CQS-2)-An empirically based update.使用扩展综合质量评分(CQS-2)对临床治疗试验的分配隐藏评估——基于实证的更新
Front Med (Lausanne). 2023 Jun 15;10:1176219. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2023.1176219. eCollection 2023.
缺乏盲法与重症监护随机对照试验死亡率的相关性:一项荟萃流行病学研究。
Crit Care Med. 2021 Oct 1;49(10):1800-1811. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000005065.
4
Are Most of the Published Clinical Trial Results in Restorative Dentistry Invalid? An Empirical Investigation.大多数修复牙科临床试验结果都是无效的吗?一项实证研究。
Rev Recent Clin Trials. 2020;15(2):122-130. doi: 10.2174/1574887115666200421110732.
5
Controversy and Debate on Meta-epidemiology. Paper 4: Confounding and other concerns in meta-epidemiological studies of bias.元流行病学的争议与辩论。论文4:偏倚的元流行病学研究中的混杂及其他问题。
J Clin Epidemiol. 2020 Jul;123:133-134. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.03.022. Epub 2020 Apr 3.
6
Controversy and Debate on Meta-epidemiology. Paper 2: Meta-epidemiological studies of bias may themselves be biased.元流行病学的争议与辩论。论文2:关于偏倚的元流行病学研究本身可能存在偏倚。
J Clin Epidemiol. 2020 Jul;123:127-130. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.03.024. Epub 2020 Apr 2.
7
Ten questions to consider when interpreting results of a meta-epidemiological study-the MetaBLIND study as a case.当解释一项荟萃流行病学研究(以 MetaBLIND 研究为例)结果时需要考虑的十个问题。
Res Synth Methods. 2020 Mar;11(2):260-274. doi: 10.1002/jrsm.1392. Epub 2020 Jan 20.
8
RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials.《随机对照试验偏倚风险评估工具2:修订版》
BMJ. 2019 Aug 28;366:l4898. doi: 10.1136/bmj.l4898.
9
Is the Deductive Falsification Approach a Better Basis for Clinical Trial Appraisal?演绎证伪法是临床试验评估的更好基础吗?
Rev Recent Clin Trials. 2019;14(3):224-228. doi: 10.2174/1574887114666190313170400.
10
Impact of Selection Bias on Treatment Effect Size Estimates in Randomized Trials of Oral Health Interventions: A Meta-epidemiological Study.选择偏倚对口腔健康干预随机试验中治疗效应大小估计的影响:一项Meta流行病学研究。
J Dent Res. 2018 Jan;97(1):5-13. doi: 10.1177/0022034517725049. Epub 2017 Aug 16.