• 1. Evidence-Based Medicine Center, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, China;2. The First Clinical Medical College, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, China;
MA Jichun, Email: tianjh@lzu.edu.cn
Export PDF Favorites Scan Get Citation

Objective  To survey the current situation of the systematic review (SR)/ meta-analysis (MA) related to interventions published in the Chinese medical journals entitled with evidence-based.
Methods  According to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, the Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine (2001.1 to 2011.12), the Chinese Journal of Evidence-based Medicine (2001.1 to 2011.12), the Chinese Journal of Evidence Based Pediatrics (2006.1 to 2011.12) and the Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Cardiovascular Medicine (2008.1 to 2011.12) were searched for SRs/MAs related to interventions. Two reviewers extracted data independently using predesigned a data extraction form, crosschecked data, and discussed to solve discrepancy. Excel software was used to for statistical analysis.
Results  A total of 487 SRs/MAs were included. 379 (77.82%) SRs/MAs were published in the Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine, 70 (14.38%) in the Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine, 30 (6.17%) in Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Pediatrics, and 8 (1.63%) in the Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Cardiovascular Medicine. The number of SRs/MAs published generally increased during 2001 to 2011. The number of author of SRs/MAs was 5±2, the number of studies that included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of SRs/MAs varied from 1 to 129 (median: 8), involving 20 diseases. 83 (17.04%) SRs/MAs focused on neoplasms, 64 (17.04%) on diseases of the circulatory system, and 54 (11.09%) on diseases of the genitourinary system. 82.75% of the included 487 SRs/MAs assessed the methodological quality of included RCTs. 44 (9.03%) SRs/MAs mentioned the methods of quality assessment, without reporting the results. The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias was the most frequently used for evaluation (314 SRs/MAs, 64.48%).
Conclusion  The number of SRs/MAs related to interventions published in the journals entitled with evidence-based is increasing generally and their topics are extensive. However, further studies should be improved in the aspects of selecting and applying the quality assessment criteria of randomized controlled trials.

Citation: MA Jichun,NA Heya,MAO Jing,ZENG Qiaolin,ZHANG Fan,ZHANG Bochao,GE Long,TIAN Jinhui. Status Survey on Systematic Review/Meta-analysis Related to Interventions Published in the Chinese Journals Entitled with Evidence-Based. Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine, 2013, 13(7): 896-900. doi: 10.7507/1672-2531.20130157 Copy

  • Previous Article

    Evaluation on the Effect Index of Diagnostic Test