《中国中药杂志》发表的干预类系统评价/Meta分析的报告质量评价研究

Report quality evaluation of systematic review or Meta-analysis published in China Journal of Chinese Materia Medica

评价《中国中药杂志》上发表的干预类系统评价／Meta分析的报告质量。电子检索CNKI数据库和《中国中药杂志》官方网址，收集自创刊以来刊载的干预类系统评价／Meta分析，共纳人40篇，其中有l篇为网状Meta分析。根据2009年发表的PRISMA声明评价纳入系统评价／Meta分析的报告质量，3篇为低质量，30篇为中等质量，7篇为高质量。所有条目平均得分为30分（中等质量2l～30．5分）。高质量（3l-40分）报告条目17个：标题、理论基础、目的、信息来源、研究选择、资料提取、资料条目、单个研究存在的偏倚、概括效应指标、研究偏倚、研究选择、研究特征、研究内部偏倚风险、单个研究结果、结果的综合、研究间偏倚、资金；中等质量（2l-30．5分）报告条目4个：纳入标准、检索、局限性、结论；低质量（≤20．5分）报告条目6个：结构式摘要、方案和注册、结果综合、其他分析（条目16）、其他分析（条目23）、证据总结。通过分析发现，《中国中药杂志》上发表的干预类系统评价／Meta分析的报告质量中等，有必要提高报告质量规范。

To evaluate the report quality of intelwention-related systematic reviews or Meta-analysis published in China Journal of Chinese Materia Medica, we searched CNKI and China Journal of Chinese Materia Medica webpages to collect intervention-related sys- tematic reviews or Meta-analysis since the first issue of the magazine. A total of 40 systematic reviews or Meta-analysis reports were in- cluded, including one network Meta-analysis. According to the PRISMA statement published in 2009, the report quality of the system- atic reviews or Meta-analysis was evaluated. According to the results, 3 had the low quality, 30 had the medium quality, and 7 had the high quality. The average score for all of items was 30 points （21-30. 5 points for the medium quality）. The 17 high-quality （31-40 points） report items were title, rationale, objectives, information sources, study selection, data collection process, data items, risk of bias in individual studies, summary measures, risk of bias across studies, study selection, study characteristics, risk of bias within studies, results of individual studies, synthesis of resuhs, risk of bias across studies and funding; the 4 medium-quality （21-30. 5 points） reporting items were eligibility criteria, search, limitations and conclusions; and the 6 low-quality （ ≤20. 5 points） reporting items were structured summary, protocol and registration, synthesis of results, additional analysis （No. 16）, additional analysis （No.23 ） and summary of evidence. Through the analysis, it is found that the report quality of intervention-related systematic reviews or Me- ta-analysis published in China Journal of Chinese Materia Medica is medium, and it is necessary to improve the quality standard of the report.