How to Write a Systematic Review
How to Write a Systematic Review
复制标题
DOI：
10.1177/0363546513497567
复制
发表时间：
2014-11-01
影响因子：
4.8
通讯作者：
Flanigan, David C.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Harris, Joshua D.;Quatman, Carmen E.;Flanigan, David C.
背景：循证医学在运动医学和骨科外科中的作用正在迅速增长。系统综述和荟萃分析也在医学文献中激增。目的：为从业者正确理解和/或进行发表在运动医学期刊上的系统综述提供必要的提纲。研究设计：综述。方法：成功的系统综述的步骤包括：确定一个无法回答的问题；明确定义研究的参与者(S)、干预(S)、比较(S)和结果(S)；使用PRISMA(系统综述和荟萃分析的首选报告项)指南和PROSPERO注册；彻底的系统数据提取；结果：提供了一个理解和进行系统评价的大纲，描述了Meta分析和系统评价之间的区别。对进行系统综述所需的步骤进行了充分的说明，包括研究目的、搜索方法、数据提取、结果报告、偏差识别和主要研究结果的报告。结论：系统综述或荟萃分析对现有的最佳证据进行批判性评价和形式综合，以提供回答特定临床问题的结论声明。然而，读者和评价者必须认识到，综述中建议的质量和力度仅与它所分析的研究的质量一样强。因此，在解释偏见和将综述的结果外推到临床实践中必须非常谨慎。如果没有关于这一主题的高级教育，读者可以按照这里讨论的步骤进行系统的复习。
Background: The role of evidence-based medicine in sports medicine and orthopaedic surgery is rapidly growing. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses are also proliferating in the medical literature.Purpose: To provide the outline necessary for a practitioner to properly understand and/or conduct a systematic review for publication in a sports medicine journal.Study Design: Review.Methods: The steps of a successful systematic review include the following: identification of an unanswered answerable question; explicit definitions of the investigation's participant(s), intervention(s), comparison(s), and outcome(s); utilization of PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) guidelines and PROSPERO registration; thorough systematic data extraction; and appropriate grading of the evidence and strength of the recommendations.Results: An outline to understand and conduct a systematic review is provided, and the difference between meta-analyses and systematic reviews is described. The steps necessary to perform a systematic review are fully explained, including the study purpose, search methodology, data extraction, reporting of results, identification of bias, and reporting of the study's main findings.Conclusion: Systematic reviews or meta-analyses critically appraise and formally synthesize the best existing evidence to provide a statement of conclusion that answers specific clinical questions. Readers and reviewers, however, must recognize that the quality and strength of recommendations in a review are only as strong as the quality of studies that it analyzes. Thus, great care must be used in the interpretation of bias and extrapolation of the review's findings to translation to clinical practice. Without advanced education on the topic, the reader may follow the steps discussed herein to perform a systematic review.