Quality assessment of systematic reviews/Meta-analyses correlated to levofloxacin for MDR-TB
-
摘要: 目的 评价国内发表的左氧氟沙星治疗耐多药肺结核疗效的系统评价/荟萃（Meta）分析的质量，促进左氧氟沙星的合理使用。 方法 检索中国知网、中国生物医学文献数据库、维普、万方等数据库相关文献，收集近10年发表的左氧氟沙星治疗耐多药肺结核疗效的系统评价/Meta分析，由两名研究者独立进行文献的筛选、资料提取、质量评价等，再进行交叉核对。采用OQAQ量表、AMSTAR量表对纳入文献进行方法学质量评价，采用PRISMA量表进行报告质量评价，然后进行相关性分析。 结果 共纳入14篇文献，4篇Meta分析，10篇系统评价。OQAQ方法学质量评分最高为7分，最低3.5分，平均6.21分；AMSTAR条目符合率最高的为条目1和9，条目2、4、8、10的符合率较好；PRISMA报告质量评分最高为21分，最低13.5分，平均19.29分。存在的问题主要有：检索策略和范围不全面、纳入与排除标准不具体、部分研究未报道选择偏倚和未进行质量评价。 结论 国内关于左氧氟沙星治疗耐多药肺结核疗效的系统评价质量较好，但方法学质量和报告质量仍有待进一步提高。Abstract: Objective Assessing the publication and quality of systematic reviews/Meta-analyses correlated to levofloxacin for MDR-TB in China to promote the rational use of levofloxacin. Methods A literature retrieving was made in CNKI/VIP/WanFang Med-online/CBM and other databases, to collect literatures published in the nearly 10 years correlated to systematic reviews/Meta-analyses of levofloxacin for MDR-TB. Two researchers screened the literatures, extracted data and assessed the quality of literatures independently, and then cross-checked. OQAQ and AMSTAR scale were used to qualify the methodological quality of included studies, PRISMA scale was used to evaluate the report quality. Results Fourteen literatures were included, of which 4 were Meta analysis and 10 were systematic reviews. OQAQ methodological quality rating up to 7 points and the lowest was 3.5 points, the average was 6.21 points. The highest rate of in line with AMSTAR were entry 1 and 9, and the compliance rate of entries 2, 4, 8, 10 were good as well. PRISMA report quality scored up to 21 points and the lowest was 13.5 points, the average was 19.29 points. The main problems were:incomprehensive search strategy and scrope, none specific inclusion and exclusion criteria, unreported selection bias and no evaluation of the quality of part of the included studies. Conclusion The publication and quality of systematic reviews/Meta-analyses correlated to levofloxacin for MDR-TB in China were good, but still need further improvement.
-
Key words:
- levofloxacin /
- multidrug-resistant tuberculosis /
- systematic review /
- Meta analysis
-
[1] 朱航,雷迅,张帆,等.左氧氟沙星治疗耐多药肺结核疗效与安全性的系统评价[J].中国循证医学杂志,2012,12(2):201-208. [2] 孙莹.氟喹诺酮类药物治疗我国耐多药肺结核疗效的系统评价[D].沈阳:中国医科大学,2013. [3] Kang D,Wu Y,Hu D,et al.Reliability and external validity of AMSTAR in assessing quality of TCM systematic reviews[J]. Evid Based Complement Alternat Med,2012,2012:732195. [4] 熊俊,陈日新. 系统评价/Meta分析方法学质量的评价工具AMSTAR[J]. 中国循证医学杂志,2011,11(9):1084-1089. [5] Zorzela L, Loke YK, Ioannidis JP, et al. PRISMA harms checklist:improving harms reporting in systematic reviews[J].BMJ,2016,352:i157. [6] 简瑶.左氧氟沙星治疗耐多药肺结核疗效与安全性的系统评价[J].临床医药文献电子杂志,2014,1(5):51. [7] 李建齐. 左氧氟沙星治疗耐多药肺结核疗效的系统评价[J].健康必读(中旬刊),2013,12(12):98. [8] 陈鹏.左氧氟沙星治疗耐多药肺结核疗效与安全性的系统评价[J].中外医学研究,2014,12(25):160-161. [9] 王倩,黄淑萍,张洁.国内应用含左氧氟沙星方案治疗耐多药结核的系统评价[J].天津药学,2008,20(3):77-78. [10] 王小虎,刘晓菊.莫西沙星与左氧氟沙星治疗慢性阻塞性肺疾病急性加重期疗效及安全性比较的系统评价[J].中国循证医学杂志,2012,12(6):694-699. [11] 王小玲,李红华.盐酸左氧氟沙星治疗难治性肺结核的临床疗效和安全性汇总分析[J].中国卫生产业,2014,11(19):40-41. [12] 谢根英,何拉结,吴荔嘉,等.莫西沙星与左氧氟沙星分别治疗慢性阻塞性肺疾病加重期疗效与安全性的系统评价[J].中国医院用药评价与分析,2013,13(7):594-598. [13] 杨立娟.含左氧氟沙星方案治疗复治肺结核临床疗效的Meta分析[J].中国防痨杂志,2009,31(7):415-419. [14] 余文韬,尹茜,吴斌,等.加替沙星对难治、耐多药肺结核有效性和安全性的Meta分析[J].中国药业,2011,20(14):17-21. [15] 张建旭,赵锋辉.国内卷曲霉素联合左氧氟沙星治疗耐药肺结核疗效和安全性的meta分析[J].中国临床研究,2012,25(6):539-542. [16] 赵冠人,马俊,冯端浩.含左氧氟沙星化疗方案治疗肺结核的系统评价[J].中国医院用药评价与分析,2011,11(12):1064-1068. [17] 费忠亭,陈震,唐瑶.左氧氟沙星治疗难治性肺结核咯血的有效性和安全性meta分析[J].中国生化药物杂志,2014,35(7):164-166. [18] 闫盈盈,易湛苗,翟所迪.国内医院药学人员系统评价/Meta分析文献发表与质量研究[J].中国循证医学杂志,2012,12(1):92-97. [19] 侯政昆,李建生,余学庆,等.国内关于肺炎系统评价和Meta分析文献的质量评价[J].中国危重病急救医学,2009,21(4):207-210. -
点击查看大图
计量
- 文章访问数: 3367
- HTML全文浏览量: 433
- PDF下载量: 496
- 被引次数: 0
下载:
