Hazard ratio (HR) is usually regarded as the effect size in survival studies. Meanwhile, it is supposed to be perfect for pooling results in the meta-analysis of survival data. However, it does not function usually due to absence of original data for pooling HR. As a compromise method, entering data from reading Kaplan-Meier curves and follow-up times into the calculation spreadsheet can also be used to obtain related survival data. But related study on the subject is scarce, and opinions are inconsistent. Accordingly, we conduct this study to further illustrate the procedure in details.
Citation：
LIU Qing, DING Li. Accessibility and validation of survival data in survival curve for meta-analysis. Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine, 2019, 19(9): 1124-1130. doi: 10.7507/1672-2531.201904111
Copy
Copyright © the editorial department of Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine of West China Medical Publisher. All rights reserved
| 1. |
孙振球, 徐勇勇. 医学统计学. 北京: 人民卫生出版社, 2010: 299-325.
|
| 2. |
Sun W, Han X, Wu S, et al. Endoscopic resection versus surgical resection for early gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Medicine, 2015, 94(43): e1649.
|
| 3. |
Bhansali MS, Vaidya JS, Bhatt RG, et al. Chemotherapy for carcinoma of the esophagus: a comparison of evidence from meta-analyses of randomized trials and of historical control studies. Ann Oncol, 1996, 7(4): 355-359.
|
| 4. |
Tierney JF, Stewart LA, Ghersi D, et al. Practical methods for incorporating summary time-to-event data into meta-analysis. Trials, 2007, 8: 16.
|
| 5. |
周支瑞, 张天嵩, 李博, 等. 生存曲线中 Meta 分析适宜数据的提取与转换. 中国循证心血管医学杂志, 2014, 6(3): 243-247.
|
| 6. |
Lim JH, Kim J, Kim SG, et al. Long-term clinical outcomes of endoscopic vs. surgical resection for early gastric cancer with undifferentiated histology. Surg Endosc, 2019, DOI: 10.1007/s00464-018-06641-6.
|
- 1. 孙振球, 徐勇勇. 医学统计学. 北京: 人民卫生出版社, 2010: 299-325.
- 2. Sun W, Han X, Wu S, et al. Endoscopic resection versus surgical resection for early gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Medicine, 2015, 94(43): e1649.
- 3. Bhansali MS, Vaidya JS, Bhatt RG, et al. Chemotherapy for carcinoma of the esophagus: a comparison of evidence from meta-analyses of randomized trials and of historical control studies. Ann Oncol, 1996, 7(4): 355-359.
- 4. Tierney JF, Stewart LA, Ghersi D, et al. Practical methods for incorporating summary time-to-event data into meta-analysis. Trials, 2007, 8: 16.
- 5. 周支瑞, 张天嵩, 李博, 等. 生存曲线中 Meta 分析适宜数据的提取与转换. 中国循证心血管医学杂志, 2014, 6(3): 243-247.
- 6. Lim JH, Kim J, Kim SG, et al. Long-term clinical outcomes of endoscopic vs. surgical resection for early gastric cancer with undifferentiated histology. Surg Endosc, 2019, DOI: 10.1007/s00464-018-06641-6.
Journal type citation(8)
| 1. | 惠鹏，张小宾，焦振东，金上博. 胆道支架和鼻胆管引流在腹腔镜胆总管探查术后一期缝合中的应用. 中国内镜杂志. 2023(08): 33-39 .  Baidu Scholar | |
| 2. | 李菠，吕明，陈汉宗. 腹腔镜胆总管探查取石Ⅰ期缝合与T管引流的疗效比较. 安徽医药. 2021(05): 935-937 . Baidu Scholar | |
| 3. | 梁斌. 腹腔镜胆总管探查术后胆总管一期缝合与T管引流的临床效果回顾性分析. 中国医疗器械信息. 2019(02): 32-33 . Baidu Scholar | |
| 4. | 刘晖，吴青松，赵家锋，张小龙，楚春香. 腹腔镜下胆总管切开取石中胆管一期缝合治疗胆总管结石的临床效果观察. 广州医药. 2019(01): 49-51+93 . Baidu Scholar | |
| 5. | 张华，方人杰. 腹腔镜胆总管探查术后胆总管一期缝合与T管引流的临床效果. 中外医学研究. 2019(32): 135-136 . Baidu Scholar | |
| 6. | 梁科伟. 腹腔镜胆总管探查一期缝合与T管引流在治疗胆总管结石中的临床应用. 航空航天医学杂志. 2018(02): 176-178 . Baidu Scholar | |
| 7. | 蒋松霖，叶辉. 大于70岁胆总管结石患者腹腔镜胆总管探查术后一期缝合的疗效观察. 中国普外基础与临床杂志. 2018(10): 1213-1217 . Baidu Scholar | |
| 8. | 江旭东，曹葆强，李凯琅，周章韵，龚仁华. 腹腔镜胆总管探查术后一期缝合与T管引流术的疗效比较. 武警医学. 2018(11): 1051-1053+1057 . Baidu Scholar | |
Other types of references(5)
| 1. | 杨贵彬. 腹腔镜下胆总管切开取石留置T管与一期缝合治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石疗效研究[D]. 华北理工大学. 2021. Baidu Scholar | |
| 2. | 郭志唐. 腹腔镜联合胆道镜及十二指肠镜在继发性胆总管结石治疗中的应用[D]. 昆明医科大学. 2018. Baidu Scholar | |
| 3. | 陈杰. 胆总管结石行腹腔镜胆总管切开取石胆管一期缝合与T管引流临床疗效分析[D]. 南昌大学. 2019. Baidu Scholar | |
| 4. | 陈伟. 腹腔镜下胆总管一期缝合治疗胆总管结石的疗效与安全性分析[D]. 湖南师范大学. 2018. Baidu Scholar | |
| 5. | 包长军. LCBDE一期缝合的临床应用及术中引流管的应用价值[D]. 皖南医学院. 2021. Baidu Scholar | |
