COVID-19疫苗有效性和安全性的系统综述和Meta分析的质量评价

Assessment of quality of systematic reviews and Meta-analyses on efficacy and safety of COVID-19 vaccines

目的评价国内外已发表的新型冠状病毒肺炎(COVID-19)疫苗有效性和安全性的系统综述(SR)和Meta分析(MA)的方法学质量。方法系统检索Medline、Embase、Cochrane Library、Web of Science、中国知网、万方数据知识服务平台、维普网、SinoMed等中英文数据库,检索时间截至2021年12月10日。双人独立筛选文献、提取信息,使用SR评价工具第2版(AMSTAR-2),从16个方面评价SR/MA的方法学质量。结果共纳入22篇SR/MA,3篇(13.6%)的总体质量为低、19篇(86.4%)的总体质量为极低。问题主要体现在研究问题和纳入标准未明确PICO(Participants,intervention,control,outcome)、未提前制定研究方案、未提供排除文献的清单及排除理由、未考虑纳入研究的偏倚风险对SR/MA或证据整合的潜在影响、未解释或讨论纳入研究的偏倚风险、未评估发表偏倚及讨论其对SR/MA的影响等方面。结论COVID-19疫苗有效性和安全性的SR/MA存在不同程度的方法学缺陷,需要进一步提高其方法学质量。

Objective To evaluate the methodology of the published systematic reviews and Meta-analyses(SR/MA)on efficacy and safety of coronavirus disease 2019(COVID-19)vaccines.Methods We conducted a retrieval for literatures published as of December 10,2021 in English databases(Medline,Embase,Cochrane Library,Web of science)and Chinese databases(CNKI,Wanfang data,VIP,Sinomed).Two reviewers independently screened literatures and extracted data.The methodology of included SR/MA papers was assessed by A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Review-2(AMSTAR-2)tool in 16 items.Results A total 22 SR/MA papers were included,in which 3(13.6%)had low quality and 19(86.4%)had very low quality.The main problems of these SR/MA included having no definite PICO(Participants,intervention,control and outcome),providing no preliminary research protocol,no list of excluded studies and justify the exclusions,making no evaluation and explanation or discussion of the risk of bias of original studies,no adequate evaluation of publication bias and discuss its likely impact on the results,etc.Conclusion SR/MA for the efficacy and safety of COVID-19 vaccines had varied methodological deficiencies,further improvements are needed.