• 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

系统评价中的常见统计错误:教程

Common statistical errors in systematic reviews: A tutorial.

作者信息

Kanellopoulou Afroditi, Dwan Kerry, Richardson Rachel

机构信息

Methods Support Unit, Evidence Production and Methods Directorate Cochrane London UK.

Department of Hygiene and Epidemiology Faculty of Medicine University of Ioannina Ioannina Greece.

出版信息

Cochrane Evid Synth Methods. 2025 Jan 29;3(2):e70013. doi: 10.1002/cesm.70013. eCollection 2025 Mar.

DOI:10.1002/cesm.70013
PMID:40475918
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11795887/
Abstract

The aim of this article is to present the most common statistical errors in meta-analyses included in systematic reviews; these are confusing standard deviation and standard error, using heterogeneity estimators for choosing between a common-effect and random-effects model, improper handling of multiarm trials, and unnecessary and misinterpreted subgroup analyses. We introduce some useful terminology and explain what authors can do to avoid these errors and how peer reviewers can spot them. We have also developed a micro-learning module to provide practical hands-on tutorial.

摘要

本文旨在介绍系统评价中纳入的Meta分析中最常见的统计错误;这些错误包括混淆标准差和标准误、使用异质性估计量来在固定效应模型和随机效应模型之间进行选择、对多臂试验处理不当,以及进行不必要且解读错误的亚组分析。我们引入了一些有用的术语,并解释作者可以采取哪些措施来避免这些错误,以及同行评审人员如何发现这些错误。我们还开发了一个微学习模块,以提供实际操作教程。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/1220/11795887/7c9353ff5790/CESM-3-e70013-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/1220/11795887/7c9353ff5790/CESM-3-e70013-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/1220/11795887/7c9353ff5790/CESM-3-e70013-g002.jpg

相似文献

1
Common statistical errors in systematic reviews: A tutorial.系统评价中的常见统计错误:教程
Cochrane Evid Synth Methods. 2025 Jan 29;3(2):e70013. doi: 10.1002/cesm.70013. eCollection 2025 Mar.
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
Identification of application and interpretation errors that can occur in pairwise meta-analyses in systematic reviews of interventions: a systematic review.系统评价中干预措施的成对荟萃分析中可能出现的应用和解释错误的识别:系统评价。
J Clin Epidemiol. 2024 Jun;170:111331. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2024.111331. Epub 2024 Mar 28.
4
A Hands-On Tutorial for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis With Example Data Set and Codes.系统评价和荟萃分析实践教程:附实例数据集和代码
J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2022 Sep 12;65(9):3217-3238. doi: 10.1044/2022_JSLHR-21-00607. Epub 2022 Aug 24.
5
Development of a checklist to detect errors in meta-analyses in systematic reviews of interventions: study protocol.制定清单以检测系统评价中干预措施的荟萃分析中的错误:研究方案。
F1000Res. 2021 Jun 8;10:455. doi: 10.12688/f1000research.53034.1. eCollection 2021.
6
Validity of data extraction in evidence synthesis practice of adverse events: reproducibility study.数据提取在不良事件证据综合实践中的有效性:再现性研究。
BMJ. 2022 May 10;377:e069155. doi: 10.1136/bmj-2021-069155.
7
Bias due to selective inclusion and reporting of outcomes and analyses in systematic reviews of randomised trials of healthcare interventions.在医疗保健干预随机试验的系统评价中,因对结果和分析进行选择性纳入及报告而产生的偏倚。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014 Oct 1;2014(10):MR000035. doi: 10.1002/14651858.MR000035.pub2.
8
With Great Power Comes Great Responsibility: Common Errors in Meta-Analyses and Meta-Regressions in Strength & Conditioning Research.能力越大,责任越大:力量与调节研究中荟萃分析和荟萃回归的常见错误。
Sports Med. 2023 Feb;53(2):313-325. doi: 10.1007/s40279-022-01766-0. Epub 2022 Oct 8.
9
Statistical heterogeneity in systematic reviews of clinical trials: a critical appraisal of guidelines and practice.临床试验系统评价中的统计学异质性:对指南与实践的批判性评估
J Health Serv Res Policy. 2002 Jan;7(1):51-61. doi: 10.1258/1355819021927674.
10
Error Matrix Tool to Overview the Validity of Evidence on Radix for Chronic Hepatitis B.错误矩阵工具概述了对慢性乙型肝炎的根的证据的有效性。
J Altern Complement Med. 2019 Sep;25(9):957-973. doi: 10.1089/acm.2018.0484. Epub 2019 Mar 18.

引用本文的文献

1
Epidemiological criteria for causation applied to human health harms from RF-EMF exposure: Bradford Hill revisited.应用于射频电磁场暴露对人类健康危害的因果关系流行病学标准:重新审视布拉德福德·希尔标准
Front Public Health. 2025 May 27;13:1559868. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2025.1559868. eCollection 2025.

本文引用的文献

1
Exploring treatment by covariate interactions using subgroup analysis and meta-regression in cochrane reviews: a review of recent practice.在Cochrane系统评价中使用亚组分析和Meta回归探索协变量交互作用的治疗效果:近期实践综述
PLoS One. 2015 Jun 1;10(6):e0128804. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0128804. eCollection 2015.
2
Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses.评估荟萃分析中的异质性
BMJ. 2003 Sep 6;327(7414):557-60. doi: 10.1136/bmj.327.7414.557.
3
Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis.在荟萃分析中量化异质性。
Stat Med. 2002 Jun 15;21(11):1539-58. doi: 10.1002/sim.1186.