西西河

主题:【原创】如何看待Cochrane Reivews-- 送 -- 虽远必诛

共:💬11 🌺49 新:
全看分页树展 · 主题
家园 【原创】如何看待Cochrane Reivews-- 送

还是谈这篇Cochrane Reviews: Chinese medicinal herbs for the common cold

首先建议大家看:外链出处

对于一个系统回顾,比较重要的内容是:检索范围,对RCTs评估标准和最后的意见汇总。

先看看这篇文章的检索范围:Electronic searches

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials

(CENTRAL) (TheCochrane Library 2008, issue 2) which contains

the Cochrane Acute Respiratory Infections Group’s Specialised

Register; MEDLINE (1966 to May 2008); EMBASE (1980 to

May 2008); AMED(1985 toMay 2008); the Chinese Biomedical

Database (CBMdisc) (1978 to May 2008); and China National

Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) (1994 to May 2008).

The MEDLINE search strategy is shown below. We combined

theMEDLINE search string with the highly sensitive search strategy

(Dickersin 1994). See Appendix 1 for the CENTRAL search

strategy. The search string was adapted for EMBASE, AMED, the

Chinese Biomedical Database and China National Knowledge Infrastructure

关键词的使用:

1 exp Common cold/

2 common cold.mp.

3 exp Rhinovirus/

4 rhinovirus$.mp.

5 (upper respiratory tract infection$ or URTI).mp.

6 (upper respiratory infection$ or URI).mp.

7 or/1-6

8 exp Medicine, Chinese Traditional/

9 exp Drugs, Chinese Herbal/

10 herbal medic$.mp.

11 medicinal herb$.mp.

12 chinese herb$.mp.

13 chinese medic$.mp.

14 or/8-13

15 7 and 14

可谓一网打尽,不存在选择上的bias。

回顾作者一共有六个,远远高于最低要求的两个独立回顾者。

Six review authors (WT, ZX, ZJ, XLX, QY, LG) performed the

searches and retrieved articles.

有明确的对RCTs的评价标准,

最后检索的结果

A total of 430 trials that claimed to be randomised were retrieved.

We successfully contacted 365 trial authors by telephone.Of these

trials, 302 were excluded, either because the trial authors misunderstood

true random allocation or the trial reports were multiple

versions of same study (see the ’Characteristics of excluded studies’

table), of those, 67 were additional studies later excluded in this

updated version of review.

One hundred and nine are listed in the ’Studies awaiting classification’

section. One of these studies, for example, assessed an

intervention containing ’Yuxincao’, a drug which the State Food

and Drug Administration (SFDA) stopped production of, due to

unclear adverse events. Other trials are allocated to this section

as we could not locate the original trial authors to identify the

randomisation method.

Seventeen studies were identified as true RCTs and fulfilled our

inclusion criteria

因此这十七个RCTs是目前中药治疗感冒的最直接证据了。

然后就评价这十七个RCTs,简单明确。

待续。

全看分页树展 · 主题


有趣有益,互惠互利;开阔视野,博采众长。
虚拟的网络,真实的人。天南地北客,相逢皆朋友

Copyright © cchere 西西河