Assessment for Risk of Bias in Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses in the Field of Hepatology.
Assessment for Risk of Bias in Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses in the Field of Hepatology.
复制标题
DOI：
10.5009/gnl14451
复制
发表时间：
2015-11-23
期刊：
影响因子：
3.4
通讯作者：
Baik SK
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Kim G;Cho YZ;Baik SK
系统评价（SR）对某一特定领域的现有证据提供最好和最客观的分析。SRs和得出的结论对于医学循证策略和临床实践的循证指南至关重要。在肝病学领域，SRs的普及程度也显著增加。然而，尽管SRs被认为比原始文章提供了更高水平的证据和更大的可信度，但在肝病学领域还没有关于SRs和荟萃分析（MAs）质量的报道。因此，我们使用测量工具评估系统评价（AMSTAR）对最近在肝病学领域（2011年1月至2014年9月）发表的225例SRs和MAs进行了质量评估。使用AMSTAR，我们发现对单个研究的科学质量评估不足，并且在许多SRs和ma中存在发表偏倚。本综述指出，需要更严格、更客观地进行SRs和MAs，以尽量减少偏倚和随机误差。因此，SRs和MAs应该得到包括临床专家、方法学家和统计学家在内的多学科方法的支持。
A systematic review (SR) provides the best and most objective analysis of the existing evidence in a particular field. SRs and derived conclusions are essential for evidence-based strategies in medicine and evidence-based guidelines in clinical practice. The popularity of SRs has also increased markedly in the field of hepatology. However, although SRs are considered to provide a higher level of evidence with greater confidence than original articles, there have been no reports on the quality of SRs and meta-analyses (MAs) in the field of hepatology. Therefore, we performed a quality assessment of 225 SRs and MAs that were recently published in the field of hepatology (January 2011 to September 2014) using A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews (AMSTAR). Using AMSTAR, we revealed both a shortage of assessments of the scientific quality of individual studies and a publication bias in many SRs and MAs. This review addresses the concern that SRs and MAs need to be conducted in a stricter and more objective manner to minimize bias and random errors. Thus, SRs and MAs should be supported by a multi-disciplinary approach that includes clinical experts, methodologists, and statisticians.