Indirect comparisons: a review of reporting and methodological quality.
Indirect comparisons: a review of reporting and methodological quality.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1371/journal.pone.0011054
复制
发表时间：
2010-11-10
期刊：
影响因子：
3.7
通讯作者：
Tudur-Smith C
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Donegan S;Williamson P;Gamble C;Tudur-Smith C
在许多情况下，对两种干预措施进行间接比较是有价值的。然而，间接比较的质量将取决于几个因素，包括所选择的方法和基本假设的有效性。发表的间接比较在医学文献中越来越常见，但到目前为止，还没有发表关于如何报告的建议。我们的目的是系统地审查质量公布的间接比较，以增加现有的经验数据表明，可以作出改进时，报告和应用间接比较。采用随机对照试验，应用统计方法间接比较两种干预措施的临床有效性的综述是合格的。我们检索了（1966-2008）数据库的摘要和评论的影响，科克伦图书馆，和Medline。评估了完整综述出版物的合格性。制定并适用了评估质量的具体标准。其中包括43项评论。在41项审评中采用了适当的方法来计算间接比较。19篇综述使用敏感性分析、亚组分析或荟萃回归评估了相似性假设。11篇综述比较了试验水平特征。24篇综述评估了统计同质性。12篇综述调查了异质性的原因。17篇综述包括相同比较的直接和间接证据; 6篇综述评估了一致性。一项综述结合了两种证据类型。25篇综述敦促谨慎解释结果，24篇综述指出结果来自间接证据，并在结果中说明这一术语。这一审查表明，在进行间接比较时，基本假设没有得到例行探讨或报告。因此，我们建议应提高间接比较的质量，特别是通过评估假设和报告所采用的评估方法。我们建议，在这篇文章中应用的质量标准可以提供一个基础，以帮助评论作者进行间接比较，并帮助适当的解释。
The indirect comparison of two interventions can be valuable in many situations. However, the quality of an indirect comparison will depend on several factors including the chosen methodology and validity of underlying assumptions. Published indirect comparisons are increasingly more common in the medical literature, but as yet, there are no published recommendations of how they should be reported. Our aim is to systematically review the quality of published indirect comparisons to add to existing empirical data suggesting that improvements can be made when reporting and applying indirect comparisons. Reviews applying statistical methods to indirectly compare the clinical effectiveness of two interventions using randomised controlled trials were eligible. We searched (1966–2008) Database of Abstracts and Reviews of Effects, The Cochrane library, and Medline. Full review publications were assessed for eligibility. Specific criteria to assess quality were developed and applied. Forty-three reviews were included. Adequate methodology was used to calculate the indirect comparison in 41 reviews. Nineteen reviews assessed the similarity assumption using sensitivity analysis, subgroup analysis, or meta-regression. Eleven reviews compared trial-level characteristics. Twenty-four reviews assessed statistical homogeneity. Twelve reviews investigated causes of heterogeneity. Seventeen reviews included direct and indirect evidence for the same comparison; six reviews assessed consistency. One review combined both evidence types. Twenty-five reviews urged caution in interpretation of results, and 24 reviews indicated when results were from indirect evidence by stating this term with the result. This review shows that the underlying assumptions are not routinely explored or reported when undertaking indirect comparisons. We recommend, therefore, that the quality of indirect comparisons should be improved, in particular, by assessing assumptions and reporting the assessment methods applied. We propose that the quality criteria applied in this article may provide a basis to help review authors carry out indirect comparisons and to aid appropriate interpretation.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
2
作者：
Cooper, Nicola J.;Sutton, Alex J.;Welton, Nicky J.
通讯作者：
Welton, Nicky J.
DOI：
10.1111/j.1742-1241.2009.02072.x
发表时间：
2009-06-01
影响因子：
2.6
作者：
Edwards, S. J.;Clarke, M. J.;Borrill, J.
通讯作者：
Borrill, J.
影响因子：
105.7
作者：
Lim, E;Ali, Z;Large, S
通讯作者：
Large, S
影响因子：
105.7
作者：
Hind, D;Calvert, N;Thomas, S
通讯作者：
Thomas, S
影响因子：
3.5
作者：
Biondi-Zoccai, GL;Agostoni, P;Colombo, A
通讯作者：
Colombo, A