Suppr超能文献

2020 年发表的非 Cochrane 系统评价中 Cochrane 偏倚风险工具 2 的使用频率和充分性:元研究。

Frequency of use and adequacy of Cochrane risk of bias tool 2 in non-Cochrane systematic reviews published in 2020: Meta-research study.

机构信息

Institute of Emergency Medicine in Split-Dalmatia County, Split, Croatia.

Department of Surgery, University Hospital Split, Split, Croatia.

出版信息

Res Synth Methods. 2024 May;15(3):430-440. doi: 10.1002/jrsm.1695. Epub 2024 Jan 23.

Abstract

Risk of bias (RoB) assessment is essential to the systematic review methodology. The new version of the Cochrane RoB tool for randomized trials (RoB 2) was published in 2019 to address limitations identified since the first version of the tool was published in 2008 and to increase the reliability of assessments. This study analyzed the frequency of usage of the RoB 2 and the adequacy of reporting the RoB 2 assessments in non-Cochrane reviews published in 2020. This meta-research study included non-Cochrane systematic reviews of interventions published in 2020. For the reviews that used the RoB 2 tool, we analyzed the reporting of the RoB 2 assessment. Among 3880 included reviews, the Cochrane RoB 1 tool was the most frequently used (N = 2228; 57.4%), followed by the Cochrane RoB 2 tool (N = 267; 6.9%). From 267 reviews that reported using the RoB 2 tool, 213 (79.8%) actually used it. In 26 (12.2%) reviews, erroneous statements were used to indicate the RoB 2 assessment. Only 20 (9.4%) reviews presented a complete RoB 2 assessment with a detailed table of answers to all signaling questions. The judgment of risk of bias by the RoB 2 tool was not justified by a comment in 158 (74.2%) reviews. Only in 33 (14.5%) of reviews the judgment in all domains was justified in the accompanying comment. In most reviews (81.7%), the RoB was inadequately assessed at the study level. In conclusion, the majority of non-Cochrane reviews published in 2020 still used the Cochrane RoB 1 tool. Many reviews used the RoB 2 tool inadequately. Further studies about the uptake and the use of the RoB 2 tool are needed.

摘要

偏倚风险(RoB)评估对于系统评价方法至关重要。2019 年发布了新版 Cochrane 随机试验 RoB 工具(RoB 2),旨在解决自该工具于 2008 年首次发布以来发现的局限性问题,并提高评估的可靠性。本研究分析了 2020 年发表的非 Cochrane 综述中 RoB 2 的使用频率和 RoB 2 评估报告的充分性。这项元研究包括 2020 年发表的干预措施非 Cochrane 系统评价。对于使用 RoB 2 工具的综述,我们分析了 RoB 2 评估的报告情况。在纳入的 3880 篇综述中,Cochrane RoB 1 工具的使用最为频繁(N=2228;57.4%),其次是 Cochrane RoB 2 工具(N=267;6.9%)。在报告使用 RoB 2 工具的 267 篇综述中,有 213 篇(79.8%)实际使用了该工具。在 26 篇(12.2%)综述中,使用了错误的陈述来表示 RoB 2 评估。只有 20 篇(9.4%)综述提供了完整的 RoB 2 评估,并详细列出了对所有信号问题的答案。在 158 篇(74.2%)综述中,RoB 2 工具的偏倚风险判断没有得到评论的支持。只有在 33 篇(14.5%)综述中,在随附的评论中对所有领域的判断是合理的。在大多数综述中(81.7%),研究层面的 RoB 评估不足。总之,2020 年发表的大多数非 Cochrane 综述仍使用 Cochrane RoB 1 工具。许多综述对 RoB 2 工具的使用不够充分。需要进一步研究 RoB 2 工具的采用和使用情况。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验