Nanhai Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Jinan University, Foshan, China.
Institute of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Jinan University, Guangzhou, China.
Brain Behav. 2024 Sep;14(9):e3629. doi: 10.1002/brb3.3629.
As the methodological quality and evidence level of the existing systematic reviews (SRs) on music as an intervention for depression have not been thoroughly evaluated, a systematic evaluation and re-evaluation (SERE) was conducted.
Multiple databases including PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, SinoMed, Wanfang, and the VIP database were searched for SRs and meta-analyses (MAs) on the effectiveness of music as an intervention for depression. The literature screening, evaluation of methodological quality, and assessment of evidence level were carried out by a team of researchers. The methodological quality was evaluated using the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews 2 (AMSTAR 2) scale in accordance with the 2020 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) criteria were utilized to assess the level of evidence.
A total of 18 SRs were included in the analysis. The 2020 PRISMA guidelines were utilized to evaluate various aspects such as search terms, funding sources, statistical methods for missing values, subgroup and sensitivity analyses, certainty assessment, excluded literature citations, assessment of publication bias, protocol information, conflicts of interest, and data availability, which were rarely reported. The evaluation of the studies using the AMSTAR 2 scale revealed that one article was rated as high quality, six were rated as low quality, and 11 were rated as very low quality. Based on the GRADE criteria evaluation, the quality of the evidence was found to be inconsistent, with reports primarily consisting of medium-quality evidence.
The methodological quality of SRs/MAs of music as an intervention in depression is generally poor, and the level of evidence is generally low.
由于现有关于音乐干预抑郁症的系统评价（SR）的方法学质量和证据水平尚未得到彻底评估，因此进行了系统评价和再评价（SERE）。
研究团队在 PubMed、Web of Science、Embase、中国知网、SinoMed、万方和维普数据库中搜索了关于音乐干预抑郁症的有效性的 SR 和荟萃分析（MA）。通过文献筛选、方法学质量评估和证据水平评估来完成。方法学质量评估使用了评估多个系统评价 2（AMSTAR 2）量表，符合 2020 年系统评价和荟萃分析报告的首选项目（PRISMA）指南，并使用推荐评估、制定与评价（GRADE）标准来评估证据水平。
共纳入 18 项 SR 进行分析。利用 2020 年 PRISMA 指南评估了搜索词、资助来源、缺失值的统计方法、亚组和敏感性分析、确定性评估、排除文献引用、发表偏倚评估、方案信息、利益冲突和数据可用性等方面，这些方面很少有报道。使用 AMSTAR 2 量表评估研究发现，一篇文章被评为高质量，六篇文章被评为低质量，十一篇文章被评为极低质量。根据 GRADE 标准评估，证据质量不一致，报告主要为中等质量证据。
音乐干预抑郁症的 SR/MA 的方法学质量普遍较差，证据水平普遍较低。
