系统综述的愿景: 优劣势分析

张希如; 毛琛

doi:10.16462/j.cnki.zhjbkz.2019.06.001

系统综述的愿景: 优劣势分析

doi: 10.16462/j.cnki.zhjbkz.2019.06.001

张希如,
毛琛^,

510515 广州, 南方医科大学公共卫生学院流行病学系

详细信息

通讯作者:
毛琛, E-mail: maochen9@smu.edu.cn

中图分类号: R181
计量
- 文章访问数: 892
- HTML全文浏览量: 285
- PDF下载量: 80
- 被引次数: 0
出版历程
- 收稿日期: 2019-05-10
- 刊出日期: 2019-06-10

Prospect of systematic review: strengths and limitations

ZHANG Xi-ru,
MAO Chen^,

Department of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou 510515, China

More Information

Corresponding author: MAO Chen, E-mail: maochen9@smu.edu.cn

摘要

摘要: 系统综述作为循证医学的核心方法，可向全面总结同一研究问题的所有证据，有助于临床医生、科研工作者和医疗卫生决策者在有限的时间里快速获取综合、精确、可靠的信息，使他们紧跟医学领域快速发展的步伐，拉近研究证据和医学实践的距离。然而，近年来人们对系统综述的质疑和批判不断。基于此，本文简要介绍了系统综述的起源和概念，详细阐述了系统综述的优势和局限性。最后，基于综述的应用和现状，对系统综述的未来作了展望。即使系统综述的方法学本身存在局限性，但仍是综合某一领域所有研究证据最权威的方法，因为我们目前没有更好的方法。如果系统地综合了所有研究的结果都是不可靠的，我们也没有理由说明其中的某个或某几个研究的结果就是公正无偏的。
- 系统综述 /
- 循证医学
Abstract: As the core method of evidence-based medicine, systematic review comprehensively summarizes all the evidence of a particular problem. It enables clinicians, scientific researchers, and health policy makers to quickly obtain a great deal of comprehensive, accurate, and reliable information in a short time, and are crucial tools for them to keep up with rapidly evolving areas of medicine. Adequate systematic reviews integrate the evidence that is accumulating in a particular field to narrate the distance between research evidence and medical practice. However, in recent years, people are always questioning and criticizing systematic review. In this situation, we introduce the origin and concept of the system review briefly and elaborate the strengths and limitations of the system review in detail. Finally, on the basis of application and current situation of the systematic review, we describe the prospect of the systematic review. Even though the methodology of the systematic review has some limitations, it is still the most authoritative method for synthesizing all research evidence in a given field, because we have no better way. If the results of a systematic review of all studies are unreliable, there is no reason to say that the results of one or several of them are impartial or unbiased.
- Systematic review /
- Evidence-based medicine

HTML全文

参考文献(6)

[1]	唐金陵, 保罗·格拉斯齐奥. 循证医学基础[M]. 北京: 北京大学医学出版社, 2016. Tang JL, Paul Glasziou. Basis of evidence-based medicine[M]. Beijing: Peking University Medical Press, 2016.
[2]	李立明. 《流行病学(第3版)》[M]. 北京: 北京大学医学出版社, 2016. Li LM. 《Epidemiology(3rd ed)》[M]. Beijing: Peking University Medical Press, 2016.
[3]	Glass GV. Primary, secondary, and meta-analysis research[J]. Education research, 1976, 6(5): 3. DOI:10.3102/0013189X 005010003.
[4]	Finckh A, Tramèr MR. Primer: strengths and weaknesses of meta-analysis[J]. Nat Clin Pract Rheumatol, 2008, 4(3): 146-152. DOI: 10.1038/ncprheum0732.
[5]	Cook DJ, Mulrow CD, Haynes RB. Systematic reviews: synthesis of best rvidence for clinical decisions[J]. Ann Intern Med, 1997, 126(5): 376-380. DOI: 10.7326/0003-4819-126-5-199703010-00006.
[6]	Marini JJ. Meta-analysis: convenient assumptions and inconvenient truth[J]. Crit Care Med, 2008, 36(1): 328-329. DOI: 10.1097/01.CCM.0000297959.02114.2B.