-
摘要: Meta分析是系统评价的重要方法。随着循证医学的发展,Meta分析研究越来越多,解读Meta分析报告已成为获取医学前沿信息的重要方法之一,掌握Meta分析方法对于临床医生从事临床和科研工作大有裨益。本文通过实例对森林图、偏倚评价图和漏斗图的解读进行详细说明,并对异质性、稳健性和样本量的评估方法进行介绍,以期帮助临床医生正确掌握Meta分析文章的解读方法。Abstract: Meta-analysis is an important method of systematic review. With the development of evidence-based medicine, there are more and more meta-analysis published. Reading and interpreting meta-analysis becomes one of the important methods for obtaining cutting-edge information. Mastering meta-analysis is essential for physicians in clinical work and research. We explained the forest plot, chart of bias evaluation, and funnel plot in detail through examples in this article. Moreover, we introduced the evaluation method of heterogeneity, robustness, and sample size to assess whether the results of the meta-analysis are reliable and can be applied to the clinical practice, in order to help physicians to correctly grasp the interpretation methods of meta-analysis.
-
Key words:
- meta-analysis /
- forest plot /
- funnel plot /
- bias /
- heterogeneity
利益冲突 无 -
图 1 使用Review Manager软件绘制结局为连续变量的森林图[6]
Terlipressin:特利加压素(试验组);Control:对照组;Mean Difference:均数差;Study or Subgroup:研究组或亚组;Mean:均数;SD:标准差;Total:总样本量; Weight:权重; IV:逆方差加权法;Random:随机效应模型;95% CI:95%置信区间;Heterogeneity:异质性;Favours[experimental]:有利于试验组;Favours[control]:有利于对照组;Test for overall effect:总体效应的检验
图 3 使用Review Manager软件绘制的偏倚风险评价图[6]
Random sequence generation (selection bias):随机序列生成(选择偏倚);Allocation concealment (selection bias):分配隐藏(选择偏倚);Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias):受试者和研究人员的盲法(实施偏倚);Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias):结果评价的盲法(测量偏倚);Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias):不完整的结果数据(随访偏倚);Selective reporting (reporting bias):选择性报告(报告偏倚);Other bias: 其他偏倚
图 4 使用Review Manager软件绘制的漏斗图[6]
MD:均数差;SE:标准误
-
[1] 彭晓霞.Meta-分析的方法学局限性及其适用领域[J].协和医学杂志,2017,6:381-386. http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/details/detail.do?_type=perio&id=xhyx201706013 [2] Smith ML,Glass GV.Meta-analysis of psychotherapy outcome studies[J].Am Psychol,1977,32:752-760. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.32.9.752 [3] Moher D,Liberati A,Tetzlaff J,et al.Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and Meta-analyses:the PRISMA statement[J].BMJ,2009,339:b2535. doi: 10.1136/bmj.b2535 [4] Ioannidis JP.The mass production of redundant,mislead-ing,and conflicted systematic reviews and Meta-analyses[J].Milbank Q,2016,94:485-514. doi: 10.1111/1468-0009.12210 [5] Vetter TR.Systematic Review and Meta-analysis:Some-times Bigger Is Indeed Bette[J].Anesth Analg,2019,128:575-583. doi: 10.1213/ANE.0000000000004014 [6] Zhu Y,Huang H,Xi X,et al.Terlipressin for septic shock patients:a Meta-analysis of randomized controlled study[J].J Intensive Care,2019,7:16. doi: 10.1186/s40560-019-0369-1 [7] Higgins JPT,Green S.Cochrane Handbook for systematic reviews of interventions version 5.1.0[M/OL].The Cochrane Collaboration.2011.https://training.cochrane.org/handbook. [8] Huang HB,Xu B,Liu GY,et al.Use of noninvasive ventilation in immunocompromised patients with acute respira-tory failure:a systematic review and Meta-analysis[J].Crit Care,2017,21:4. doi: 10.1186/s13054-016-1586-9 [9] Wang M,Williamson JM.Generalization of the Mantel-Haenszel estimating function for sparse clustered binary data[J].Biometrics,2005,61:973-981. doi: 10.1111/j.1541-0420.2005.00362.x [10] 张天嵩,钟文昭,李博.实用循证医学方法学[M].湖南:中南大学出版社,2014. [11] Olivo SA,Macedo LG,Gadotti IC,et al.Scales to assess the quality of randomized controlled trials:a systematic review[J].Phys Ther,2008,88:156-175. doi: 10.2522/ptj.20070147 [12] Huang HB,Jiang W,Wang CY,et al.Stress ulcer prophylaxis in intensive care unit patients receiving enteral nutrition:a systematic review and Meta-analysis[J].Crit Care,2018,22:20. doi: 10.1186/s13054-017-1937-1 [13] Zhang ZH,Xu X,Ni HY.Small studies may overestimate the effect sizes in critical care Meta-analyses:a Meta-epidemiological study[J].Crit Care,2013,17:R2. doi: 10.1186/cc11919 [14] Wetterslev J,Thorlund K,Brok J,et al.Trial sequential analysis may establish when firm evidence is reached in cumulative Meta-analysis[J].J Clin Epidemiol,2008,61:64-75. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2007.03.013 -