骨关节炎单纯手法研究的国内期刊文献计量学及偏倚风险分析

An Analysis of the Bibliometrics and Risk of Bias of Domestic Journals about Simple Manipulations in Treatment of Osteoarthritis

目的：了解骨关节炎单纯手法研究的历史与现状，并评价其临床随机试验偏倚风险。方法：以CNKI、万方、维普三大全文数据库收录的骨关节炎单纯手法研究文献为对象，对年度分布趋势、研究类型、期刊排名分布、手法种类等方面进行计量学分析，用Cochrane偏倚风险评估工具对近10年发表于核心期刊的临床随机对照试验进行偏倚风险评价。结果：共筛选出与骨关节炎单纯手法治疗相关的文献193篇，分布在70余种期刊中；近10年手法治疗骨关节炎的研究文献总体呈递增趋势，但核心期刊发文量未见明显增长：发文量排名前5的期刊共发文69篇，占总量的35．8％：临床研究占总量的74．1％，绝大部分研究集中在膝骨关节炎中：Cochrane偏倚风险评估表明，手法治疗骨关节炎的随机对照临床试验资料容易出现严重的偏倚风险。结论：高质量、高水平的研究所占比例有待提高：要提高基础理论等非临床试验研究的比重，临床随机对照试验应注重偏倚风险的控制。

Objective： To understand the history and current situation of the treatment of osteoarthritis with simple manipulation, and to evaluate the risk of bias of randomized controlled trials. Methods： The relative research literatures published included in CNKI, Wangfa, VIP were collected. We make metrology analysis from the annual distribution trends, study type, journal ranking distribution and species of manipulation. A bias evaluation of randomized controlled trials published in core journals in the past 10 years was made by the Coehrane Collaboration＇ s tool for assessing risk of bias. Results： A total of 193 related literatures were distributed in more than 70 journals. Nearly a decadci relative research literatures showed an increasing trend, but there is not significant growth in the amount of core journals. The top five journals posts are 69 （35.8% of the total）, clinical research accounts for 74.1% of the total and most of the researches have focused on knee osteoarthritis. Cochrane risk of bias assessment showed that randomized controlled clinical trial data is prone to a serious risk of bias. Conclusion： The proportion of high-quality and high-level research should be improved. Experimental study and other nonclinical studies must be promoted in future studies. The control of risk of bias should be a vital role in randomized controlled trials.