試驗性和觀察性研究相關醫學文獻質量評價方法_《中國循證醫學雜志》

作者：

陳澤鑫 , 劉慧 , 潘益峰 ,  余運賢

浙江大學醫學部公共衛生學院流行病與衛生統計學教研室（杭州?310058）;

關鍵詞：

文獻質量評價方法系統評價

DOI：

10.7507/1672-2531.20110207

視頻：

導出 下載 收藏 掃碼 引用

摘要 全文 圖表 視頻 參考文獻 施引文獻 補充材料

隨著科研事業的蒸蒸日上，全球醫學文獻的數量也呈爆炸式增長。英國皇家學會2011年3月的統計數據顯示，中國發表的文獻數量所占比重已從本世紀初的4.4%增長到12.2%，躍居全球第二。但文獻的被引率卻明顯滯后于文獻數量的增長。鑒于醫學文獻的質量關乎到研究結果的可靠性，因此如何評價并提高文獻質量至關重要。本文將對現有的可信性較好的醫學文獻質量評價方法進行綜述。

引用本文： 陳澤鑫,劉慧,潘益峰,余運賢. 試驗性和觀察性研究相關醫學文獻質量評價方法. 中國循證醫學雜志, 2011, 11(11): 1229-1236. doi: 10.7507/1672-2531.20110207 復制

1.	2 Egger M, Schneider M, Davey SG. Spurious precision? Meta-analysis of observational studies. BMJ , 1998, 316(7125): 140-144.
2.	3 Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carroll D, et al . Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary?. Control Clin Trials , 1996, 17(1): 1-12.
3.	4 Verhagen AP, de Vet HC, de Bie RA, et al . The Delphi list: a criteria list for quality assessment of randomized clinical trials for conducting systematic reviews developed by Delphi consensus. J Clin Epidemiol , 1998, 51(12): 1235-1241.
4.	7 Moher D, Hopewell S, Schulz KF, et al . [CONSORT 2010 Explanation and Elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials (Chinese version)]. Zhong Xi Yi Jie He Xue Bao , 2010, 8(8): 701-741.
5.	8 Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D. CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomized trials. Ann Intern Med , 2010, 152(11): 726-732.
6.	10 Chalmers TC, Smith HJ, Blackburn B, et al . A method for assessing the quality of a randomized control trial. Control Clin Trials , 1981, 2(1): 31-49.
7.	11 Deeks JJ, Dinnes J, D'Amico R, et al . Evaluating non-randomised intervention studies. Health Technol Assess , 2003, 7(27): 1-173.
8.	12 Sanderson S, Tatt ID, Higgins JP. Tools for assessing quality and susceptibility to bias in observational studies in epidemiology: a systematic review and annotated bibliography. Int J Epidemiol , 2007, 36(3): 666-676.
9.	13 Shamliyan T, Kane RL, Dickinson S. A systematic review of tools used to assess the quality of observational studies that examine incidence or prevalence and risk factors for diseases. J Clin Epidemiol , 2010, 63(10): 1061-1070.
10.	14 Wells G, Shea B, O'Connell D, et al . The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for assessing the quality of nonrandomised studies in meta-analyses. 2010. Available from: URL: http://www.ohri.ca/programs/clinical_epidemiology/oxford.asp.
11.	15 Wells G, Shea B, O'Connell D, et al . NEWCASTLE - OTTAWA QUALITY ASSESSMENT SCALE --COHORT STUDIES. 2010. Available from: URL: http://www.ohri.ca/programs/clinical_epidemiology/oxford.asp.
12.	16 Wells G, Shea B, O'Connell D, et al . NEWCASTLE - OTTAWA QUALITY ASSESSMENT SCALE --CASE CONTROL STUDIES. 2010. Available from: URL: http://www.ohri.ca/programs/clinical_epidemiology/oxford.asp.
13.	17 Downs SH, Black N. The feasibility of creating a checklist for the assessment of the methodological quality both of randomised and non-randomised studies of health care interventions. J Epidemiol Community Health , 1998, 52(6): 377-384.
14.	18 Reisch JS, Tyson JE, Mize SG. Aid to the evaluation of therapeutic studies. Pediatrics , 1989, 84(5): 815-827.
15.	20 Cowley DE. Prostheses for primary total hip replacement. A critical appraisal of the literature. Int J Technol Assess Health Care , 1995, 11(4): 770-778.
16.	劉建平. 非隨機研究的系統評價方法（一）. 中國循證醫學, 2001, 1(4): 239-243.
17.	何俐, 劉鳴, 張鳴明, 等. 中國循證醫學/Cochrane中心數據庫手檢及錄入問題解析. 華西醫學, 2000, 15(4): 390-391.
18.	Systems to Rate the Strength of Scientific Evidence. Evidence Report/Technology Assessment: Number 47. Available from: URL: http://archive.ahrq.gov/clinic/epcsums/strengthsum.htm.
19.	郭新峰, 溫澤淮, 老鷹榮, 等. 臨床試驗質量評價工具及其應用. 中國循證醫學雜志, 2004, 4(7): 484-487.
20.	Thomas H. QUALITY ASSESSMENT TOOL FOR QUANTITATIVE STUDIES. Effective Public Health Practice Project. McMaster University, Toronto. 2003. Available from: URL: http://www.ephpp.ca/tools.html.

1. 2 Egger M, Schneider M, Davey SG. Spurious precision? Meta-analysis of observational studies. BMJ , 1998, 316(7125): 140-144.
2. 3 Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carroll D, et al . Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary?. Control Clin Trials , 1996, 17(1): 1-12.
3. 4 Verhagen AP, de Vet HC, de Bie RA, et al . The Delphi list: a criteria list for quality assessment of randomized clinical trials for conducting systematic reviews developed by Delphi consensus. J Clin Epidemiol , 1998, 51(12): 1235-1241.
4. 7 Moher D, Hopewell S, Schulz KF, et al . [CONSORT 2010 Explanation and Elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials (Chinese version)]. Zhong Xi Yi Jie He Xue Bao , 2010, 8(8): 701-741.
5. 8 Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D. CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomized trials. Ann Intern Med , 2010, 152(11): 726-732.
6. 10 Chalmers TC, Smith HJ, Blackburn B, et al . A method for assessing the quality of a randomized control trial. Control Clin Trials , 1981, 2(1): 31-49.
7. 11 Deeks JJ, Dinnes J, D'Amico R, et al . Evaluating non-randomised intervention studies. Health Technol Assess , 2003, 7(27): 1-173.
8. 12 Sanderson S, Tatt ID, Higgins JP. Tools for assessing quality and susceptibility to bias in observational studies in epidemiology: a systematic review and annotated bibliography. Int J Epidemiol , 2007, 36(3): 666-676.
9. 13 Shamliyan T, Kane RL, Dickinson S. A systematic review of tools used to assess the quality of observational studies that examine incidence or prevalence and risk factors for diseases. J Clin Epidemiol , 2010, 63(10): 1061-1070.
10. 14 Wells G, Shea B, O'Connell D, et al . The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for assessing the quality of nonrandomised studies in meta-analyses. 2010. Available from: URL: http://www.ohri.ca/programs/clinical_epidemiology/oxford.asp.
11. 15 Wells G, Shea B, O'Connell D, et al . NEWCASTLE - OTTAWA QUALITY ASSESSMENT SCALE --COHORT STUDIES. 2010. Available from: URL: http://www.ohri.ca/programs/clinical_epidemiology/oxford.asp.
12. 16 Wells G, Shea B, O'Connell D, et al . NEWCASTLE - OTTAWA QUALITY ASSESSMENT SCALE --CASE CONTROL STUDIES. 2010. Available from: URL: http://www.ohri.ca/programs/clinical_epidemiology/oxford.asp.
13. 17 Downs SH, Black N. The feasibility of creating a checklist for the assessment of the methodological quality both of randomised and non-randomised studies of health care interventions. J Epidemiol Community Health , 1998, 52(6): 377-384.
14. 18 Reisch JS, Tyson JE, Mize SG. Aid to the evaluation of therapeutic studies. Pediatrics , 1989, 84(5): 815-827.
15. 20 Cowley DE. Prostheses for primary total hip replacement. A critical appraisal of the literature. Int J Technol Assess Health Care , 1995, 11(4): 770-778.
16. 劉建平. 非隨機研究的系統評價方法（一）. 中國循證醫學, 2001, 1(4): 239-243.
17. 何俐, 劉鳴, 張鳴明, 等. 中國循證醫學/Cochrane中心數據庫手檢及錄入問題解析. 華西醫學, 2000, 15(4): 390-391.
18. Systems to Rate the Strength of Scientific Evidence. Evidence Report/Technology Assessment: Number 47. Available from: URL: http://archive.ahrq.gov/clinic/epcsums/strengthsum.htm.
19. 郭新峰, 溫澤淮, 老鷹榮, 等. 臨床試驗質量評價工具及其應用. 中國循證醫學雜志, 2004, 4(7): 484-487.
20. Thomas H. QUALITY ASSESSMENT TOOL FOR QUANTITATIVE STUDIES. Effective Public Health Practice Project. McMaster University, Toronto. 2003. Available from: URL: http://www.ephpp.ca/tools.html.

《中國循證醫學雜志》

試驗性和觀察性研究相關醫學文獻質量評價方法

摘要 全文 圖表 視頻 參考文獻 施引文獻 補充材料

上一篇

下一篇

Format

Content

《中國循證醫學雜志》

試驗性和觀察性研究相關醫學文獻質量評價方法

摘要 全文 圖表 視頻 參考文獻 施引文獻 補充材料

上一篇

下一篇

Format

Content

摘要全文圖表視頻參考文獻施引文獻補充材料