摘要
目的了解目前中文期刊发表的中医药系统评价/Meta分析的现状。方法计算机检索中国生物医学文献数据库(CBM,1978～2009.7.31),查找相关的中医药系统评价/Meta分析。对符合纳入标准的文献,根据研究目的提取相关信息,以发表年限、发表期刊、作者地区、作者数及发表篇数、病种和干预措施为分析指标,采用SPSS 15.0软件进行描述性分析。结果共纳入245篇文献。其中中文238篇,英文7篇,分别发表于117种期刊,发表年限在1998～2008年,发文量呈加速增长趋势。该245篇文献的第一作者除1篇来自德国外,其余均来自国内24个省(自治区、直辖市);每篇文献作者数在1～11人不等;共有186人以第一作者身份发表过文章,发表篇数在1～29篇不等。文献涉及病种按国际疾病分类第十版(ICD-10)分类,共涉及16类。干预措施为药物者218篇(上市药物106篇,自拟方25篇,既涉及上市药又涉及自拟方70篇,未报告具体的干预措施17篇),占89%;非药物者27篇(针灸26篇,推拿1篇),占11%。药物干预中自拟方和上市药/自拟方绝大多数(95.8%)进行了不恰当的合并分析。结论循证医学在国内中医领域的推广面已较广,中医药系统评价/Meta分析文献量呈加速增长的趋势,其涉及病种较好地覆盖了当前中医治疗的优势病种,但存在地区不平衡。今后药物干预的系统评价/Meta分析应更多针对中成药和单味药而非自拟方,并应更多关注优势病种和优势药物;非药物干预采用针灸时也要注意控制临床异质性。
Objective To learn the current situation of traditional Chinese medicine （TCM） systematic reviews/ meta-analyses published in Chinese journals. Methods All TCM systematic reviews/meta-analyses published from 1978 to July 31, 2009 were searched in the Chinese Biomedical Database （CBM）. According to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, relevant information was extracted on the basis of research purpose. Meanwhile, publication year, journal name, author＇s district, number of authors and their articles, types of diseases and interventions were took as the indexes, and then descriptive analysis was performed using SPSS 15.0 software. Results A total of 245 articles including 238 in Chinese and 7 in English were included. All of them were published in 117 different journals from 1998 to 2008, showing an accelerating growth trend of article number. In addition to only one article with first author from Germany, the first author of other 244 were from 24 domestic provinces （autonomous regions and municipalities）; the number of authors ranged from 1 to 11; a total of 186 people had published articles as first author, and the number of their published articles ranged from 1 to 29. There were 16 types of diseases according to the International Classification of Diseases 10th Edition （ICD-10）. Totally, 218 articles took drugs as interventions （including 106 listed drugs, 25 self-made prescriptions, 70 related to both listed drugs and self-made prescriptions, and 17 without reporting detailed interventions）, accounting for 89%; and 27 articles were about non-drug interventions （including 26 about acupuncture and 1 about massage）, accounting for 11%. Most （95.8%） of the articles about self-made prescriptions and listed drugs/self-made prescriptions adopted inappropriate pooled analyses. Conclusion Evidence-based medicine has been spread into the field of TCM, the number of TCM systematic reviews/meta-analyses shows an accelerated growth trend. The types of diseases discussed in the literature were almost the same as the diseases those could be effectively treated by TCM, but there existed imbalance in districts. In the future, systematic review/meta-analysis on drug intervention should aim at Chinese patent medicines and single medicines rather than self-made prescriptions, and should pay more attention to advantageous drugs and advantageous treatments of diseases. Moreover, importance should be also attached to clinical heterogeneity controlling when using acupuncture as a non-drug intervention.
出处
《中国循证医学杂志》
CSCD
2012年第12期1526-1530,共5页
Chinese Journal of Evidence-based Medicine
关键词
中医药
系统评价
META分析
现状分析
Traditional Chinese Medicine
Systematic review
Meta-analysis
Status quo analysis
