Suppr超能文献

系统评价空气污染暴露与生殖和儿童健康的证据体评价系统:方法学调查。

Systems for rating bodies of evidence used in systematic reviews of air pollution exposure and reproductive and children's health: a methodological survey.

机构信息

Department of Epidemiology, Fielding School of Public Health, University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), 650 Charles E Young Dr S, Los Angeles, CA, 90095, USA.

Department of Molecular, Cell, and Developmental Biology, University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), Los Angeles, CA, USA.

出版信息

Environ Health. 2024 Mar 28;23(1):32. doi: 10.1186/s12940-024-01069-z.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Translating findings from systematic reviews assessing associations between environmental exposures and reproductive and children's health into policy recommendations requires valid and transparent evidence grading.

METHODS

We aimed to evaluate systems for grading bodies of evidence used in systematic reviews of environmental exposures and reproductive/ children's health outcomes, by conducting a methodological survey of air pollution research, comprising a comprehensive search for and assessment of all relevant systematic reviews. To evaluate the frameworks used for rating the internal validity of primary studies and for grading bodies of evidence (multiple studies), we considered whether and how specific criteria or domains were operationalized to address reproductive/children's environmental health, e.g., whether the timing of exposure assessment was evaluated with regard to vulnerable developmental stages.

RESULTS

Eighteen out of 177 (9.8%) systematic reviews used formal systems for rating the body of evidence; 15 distinct internal validity assessment tools for primary studies, and nine different grading systems for bodies of evidence were used, with multiple modifications applied to the cited approaches. The Newcastle Ottawa Scale (NOS) and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) framework, neither developed specifically for this field, were the most commonly used approaches for rating individual studies and bodies of evidence, respectively. Overall, the identified approaches were highly heterogeneous in both their comprehensiveness and their applicability to reproductive/children's environmental health research.

CONCLUSION

Establishing the wider use of more appropriate evidence grading methods is instrumental both for strengthening systematic review methodologies, and for the effective development and implementation of environmental public health policies, particularly for protecting pregnant persons and children.

摘要

背景

将系统评价中关于环境暴露与生殖和儿童健康之间关联的研究结果转化为政策建议,需要有效的、透明的证据分级。

方法

我们旨在通过对空气污染研究进行方法学调查,对所有相关的系统评价进行全面搜索和评估,来评估用于评估环境暴露与生殖/儿童健康结局的系统评价的证据体分级系统。为了评估用于评估原始研究内部有效性和证据体分级(多项研究)的框架,我们考虑了是否以及如何具体实施特定标准或领域来解决生殖/儿童环境健康问题,例如,暴露评估的时间是否针对脆弱的发育阶段进行了评估。

结果

在 177 篇系统评价中,有 18 篇(9.8%)使用了正式的证据体分级系统;15 种不同的原始研究内部有效性评估工具和 9 种不同的证据体分级系统被使用,对引用的方法进行了多次修改。纽卡斯尔-渥太华量表(NOS)和推荐分级、评估、发展与评估(GRADE)框架,均不是为该领域专门开发的,分别是用于评估个体研究和证据体的最常用方法。总的来说,所确定的方法在全面性和适用于生殖/儿童环境健康研究方面具有高度的异质性。

结论

广泛采用更合适的证据分级方法,对于加强系统评价方法学以及制定和实施有效的环境公共卫生政策都非常重要,特别是对于保护孕妇和儿童。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3023/10976715/5b547ad978d1/12940_2024_1069_Fig1_HTML.jpg

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