RCT文献质量评价汇总.pptVIP

RCT文献质量评价 .精品课件. * 严格文献评价 －－证据的质量 .精品课件. * Meta-分析的基本步骤 提出问题，制定研究计划 检索资料 选择符合纳入标准的研究 纳入研究的质量评价 提取纳入文献的数据信息 资料的统计学处理 敏感性分析 形成结果报告 .精品课件. * Tools for assessing quality and risk of bias Scales（评分）, in which various components of quality are scored and combined to give a summary score; Checklists（清单、分类）, in which specific questions are asked .精品课件. * Cochrane handbook5_0_1 第八章: Table 8.5.c: Criteria for judging risk of bias in the ‘Risk of bias’ assessment tool .精品课件. * Assessment of risk of bias Sequence generation（随机分配方案产生 ） Allocation concealment（分配方案隐藏） Blinding （盲法） Incomplete outcome data （结果数据不完整） Selective outcome reporting（选择性报告结果 ） Other bias（其它影响真实性因素：无其它偏倚） .精品课件. * For each entry, an answer ‘Yes’ indicates a low risk of bias, and an answer ‘No’ indicates high risk of bias, and ‘Unclear’ indicates unclear or unknown risk of bias. .精品课件. * (1) Was the allocation sequence adequately generated? Low risk of bias: a random component in the sequence generation process was reported. High risk of bias: a non-random component in the sequence generation process was reported. Uncertain risk of bias: insufficient information about the sequence generation process to permit judgment of Yes or No. .精品课件. * （1）随机分配方案产生 正确：采用随机数字表、计算机产生随机数字、抛硬币、掷骰子或抽签等方法 不正确： 按患者生日、住院日或住院号等的末尾数字的奇数或偶数 交替分配方法； 或者根据医生、患者、实验检查结果或干预措施的可获得性分配患者入组 不清楚： 根据干预措施的可获得性 文中信息不详，难以判断正确与否 .精品课件. * (2)?Was allocation adequately concealed? Low risk of bias: concealed allocation was completed by clearly described methods so that either participants or investigators could not foresee assignment. High risk of bias: participants or investigators enrolling participants could possibly foresee assignments Uncertain risk of bias: insufficient information to permit judgment of Yes or No of concealment .精品课件. * （2）分配方案隐藏 完善： 中心随机，包括采用电话、网络和药房控制的随机 按顺序编号或编码的相同容器 按顺序编码、密封、不透光的信封 不完善： 公开随机分配序列如列出随机数字 未密封、透光或未按顺序编号的信封 交替分配 根据住院号、生日等末尾数字的奇数或偶数 不清楚： 未提及分配方案隐藏 提供的信息不能判断是否完善，如使用信封，但未描述是否按顺序编码、密封、