针灸治疗坐骨神经痛系统评价/Meta-分析的方法学质量及报告质量评价

Assessment of Methodological Quality and Reporting Quality of Systematic Reviews / Meta-analyses of Acupuncture for Sciatica

目的:评价目前国内外针灸治疗坐骨神经痛的系统评价/Meta-分析的方法学质量和报告质量。方法:检索国内外大型医学数据库,依照纳入/排除标准进行严格筛选,分别采用AMSTAR量表和PRISMA清单对最终纳入的文献进行方法学质量评价和报告质量评价。结果:(1)纳入的8篇系统评价/Meta-分析,均存在不同程度的方法学质量问题,主要包括:所有研究均未提供纳入文献和排除文献清单报告;87.5%的研究缺少相关利益冲突报告;75%的研究未进行发表偏倚分析等。(2)报告质量方面,存在的主要问题包括:所有研究均未对结构式摘要、目的、方案和注册进行完整报告;75%的研究未对研究特征、其他分析进行完整报告;62.5%的研究未对研究理论基础、研究间偏倚、证据强度总结、资金支持进行完整报告等。结论:目前国内外针灸治疗坐骨神经痛的系统评价/Meta-分析质量参差不齐,需进一步提高方法学水平并规范报告,以期为循证决策提供高质量的证据。

Objective： To assess the methodological quality and reporting quality of existing domestic and overseas systematic reviews/Meta-analyses of acupuncture for sciatica. Methods： Comprehensively retrieve large medical databases at home and abroad, conduct strict screening according to inclusion/exclusion criteria, and evaluate the methodological quality and reporting quality of in- cluded reviews respectively based on AMSTAR scale and PRISMA statement. Results： （ 1 ） There are more or less existing methodolog- ical quality problems in 8 included reviews. Mainly include ： all the reviews didn＇ t provide the list of included and excluded studies, 87.5% were lack of the report of potential conflicts of interest, and 75% didn＇ t assess the likelihood of publication bias, etc. （2） As for reporting quality, main deficiencies include： none of literatures carried out intact report on structured summary, objectives, protocol and registration, 75% of literatures didn＇ t conduct intact report on study characteristics and additional analysis, and that 62.5% of literatures didn＇ t completely report on rationale, risk of bias among studies, summary of evidence and funding. Conclusion： At present the quality of systematic reviews/meta-analyses of acupuncture for sciatica is uneven, which is asking for further improvement of methodology and standardization of reporting to provide high-quality evidence for evidence-based decision.