The summary of finding (SoF) table for network meta-analysis (NMA) was developed by the GRADE working group to facilitate and consolidate understanding NMA findings and GRADE certainty of evidence. This paper introduces the development process, the structure of NMA-SoF and limitations. A NMA publication was presented as an example to comprehensively illustrate the application of the NMA-SoF table.
混合模型框架下的模型，如潜变量增长混合模型（latent growth mixture modeling，LGMM）或潜类别增长分析（latent class growth analysis，LCGA），因估算过程中涉及多个决策过程，导致潜变量轨迹分析结果的报告呈现多样性。为解决这一问题，指南制订小组按照系统化的制订流程，通过 4 轮德尔菲法调查，遵循专家小组意见，提出了各领域报告潜变量轨迹分析结果时需采用统一的标准，最终确定了报告轨迹研究结果必要的关键条目，发布了潜变量轨迹研究报告规范（guidelines for reporting on latent trajectory studies，GRoLTS），并利用 GRoLTS 评价了 38 篇使用 LGMM 或 LCGA 研究创伤后应激轨迹的论文的报告情况。
近十年，在药品不良反应监测领域，基于医疗保健数据库的安全信号检测方法受到越来越多的关注，已成为弥补自发报告固有局限性的重要手段。目前数据挖掘方法主要基于比值失衡分析法（disproportionality analysis）、传统药物流行病学设计（如自身对照设计）、序列对称分析（sequence symmetry analysis，SSA）、序贯统计检验（sequential statistical testing）、时序关联规则（temporal association rules）、监督机器学习（supervised machine learning，SML）、树状扫描统计量方法（tree-based scan statistic）等。本文从应用场景和实用性角度对医疗保健数据库中安全信号检测方法及其性能进行介绍。
This paper introduced the preferred reporting items for journal and conference abstracts of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of diagnostic test accuracy studies (PRISMA-DTA for abstracts), which was published in BMJ in March 2021. This paper presented the 12 items of checklist, explanations, and examples of complete reporting, to help domestic researchers to report complete and informative abstracts of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of diagnostic test accuracy studies.
The PRISMA aims to enhance the transparency and reporting quality of systematic reviews. PRISMA 2020 is an update version of PRISMA 2009, which was published in BMJ in March, 2021. This article compared the PRISMA 2020 and PRISMA 2009, interpreted PRISMA 2020 with representative examples, aiming to help Chinese scholars better understand and apply this reporting guideline, thus to improve the reporting quality of systematic reviews.
ObjectiveTo systematically review the efficacy of treatments for β-coronaviruses.MethodsPubMed, EMbase, Web of Science, The Cochrane Library, SinoMed, CNKI and WanFang Data databases were electronically searched to collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized controlled trials (non-RCTs) of treatments for β-coronaviruses from inception to June 17th, 2020. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. Meta-analysis was then performed using Stata 14.0 software.ResultsA total of 109 studies invoving 23 210 patients were included. The results of the systematic review showed that compared with standard of care, corticosteroids could reduce mortality and increase cure rate for COVID-19. However, chloroquine could decrease cure rate. In severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) patients, corticosteroids could decrease the cure rate. In Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) patients, ribavirin/interferon/both drugs showed higher mortality.ConclusionsThe currently limited evidence shows that corticosteroids may be effective to COVID-19 patients while having limited effects on SARS patients. Hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine may have negative effects on COVID-19 patients. Ribavirin/interferon may be harmful to MERS patients. Due to limited quality and quantity of the included studies, more high quality studies are needed to verify the above conclusions.