دورية أكاديمية
[Methodological and reporting quality assessment for Chinese systematic reviews and meta analysis in oral medicine].
| العنوان: | [Methodological and reporting quality assessment for Chinese systematic reviews and meta analysis in oral medicine]. |
|---|---|
| المؤلفون: | Yang SL; Department of Stomatology, The First People's Hospital of Yongkang City. Yongkang 321300, Zhejiang Province, China. E-mail:452838861@qq.com., Ying K, Wang F, Wang L, Ren XY, Yang QF |
| المصدر: | Shanghai kou qiang yi xue = Shanghai journal of stomatology [Shanghai Kou Qiang Yi Xue] 2015 Aug; Vol. 24 (4), pp. 505-10. |
| نوع المنشور: | Journal Article |
| اللغة: | Chinese |
| بيانات الدورية: | Publisher: School of Stomatology, Shanghai Jiao Tong University Country of Publication: China NLM ID: 101090220 Publication Model: Print Cited Medium: Print ISSN: 1006-7248 (Print) Linking ISSN: 10067248 NLM ISO Abbreviation: Shanghai Kou Qiang Yi Xue Subsets: MEDLINE |
| أسماء مطبوعة: | Publication: Shanghai : School of Stomatology, Shanghai Jiao Tong University Original Publication: Shanghai : Shanghai di 2 yi ke da xue, Shanghai yi xue hui kou qiang xue hui, |
| مواضيع طبية MeSH: | Meta-Analysis as Topic* , Oral Medicine*, China ; Data Collection ; Humans ; Quality Assurance, Health Care |
| مستخلص: | Purpose: To evaluate the methodology and reporting quality of Chinese systematic reviews and meta analysis in oral medicine. Methods: Chinese literatures of systematic reviews and meta analysis in oral medicine were searched in the CBM, VIP, WANFANG Database and CNKI from the establishment date to August 30, 2014. Two researchers screened and evaluated the data independently, and disagreements were resolved by discussion. Methodology and reporting quality of included literatures were evaluated by AMSTAR and PRISMA scale. Results: Of the 204 literatures included in the analysis, the highest and lowest scores of methodology quality were 9 and 0, respectively. The average score was 4.95 ± 2.45. The main problems were insufficient in literature searching, absence of a list of included and excluded studies, lack of assessment for publication bias, etc. The highest and lowest scores of reporting quality were 21 and 4, and the average score of reporting quality was 14.07 ± 3.62. The main problems were incomplete report in abstract, data collection and analysis methods, bias control, conclusion, etc. Conclusions: The methodological qualities of Chinese systematic reviews and meta analysis in oral medicine are generally low, and their reporting qualities are also needed to be improved. |
| تواريخ الأحداث: | Date Created: 20150919 Date Completed: 20160915 Latest Revision: 20181202 |
| رمز التحديث: | 20231215 |
| PMID: | 26383582 |
| قاعدة البيانات: | MEDLINE |
| تدمد: | 1006-7248 |
|---|