這是 CEBM checklist for SR Q2 的內容
我想要拆解 Q2 為更細項的小題目，目標是 3~7 題。拆解的小題目要符合原始 Q2 的內容/評估順序/原則。
###
CEBM for SR: Q2
Is it unlikely that important, relevant studies were missed?
What is best?
The starting point for a comprehensive search for all relevant studies is the major bibliographic databases (eg Medline, Cochrane, EMBASE, etc) but should also include a search of reference lists from relevant studies and contact with experts, particularly to inquire about unpublished studies. The search should not be limited to English language only. The search strategy should include both MESH terms and text words.
Where do I find the information?
The Methods section should describe the search strategy, including the terms used, in some detail. The Results section will outline the number of titles and abstracts reviewed, the number of fulltext studies retrieved, and the number of studies excluded together with the reasons for exclusion. This information may be presented in a figure or flow chart.
In this paper:
[ ] Yes
[ ] No
[ ] Unclear
Comment: ###
CEBM for SR: Q2
Is it unlikely that important, relevant studies were missed?
What is best?
The starting point for a comprehensive search for all relevant studies is the major bibliographic databases (eg Medline, Cochrane, EMBASE, etc) but should also include a search of reference lists from relevant studies and contact with experts, particularly to inquire about unpublished studies. The search should not be limited to English language only. The search strategy should include both MESH terms and text words.
Where do I find the information?
The Methods section should describe the search strategy, including the terms used, in some detail. The Results section will outline the number of titles and abstracts reviewed, the number of fulltext studies retrieved, and the number of studies excluded together with the reasons for exclusion. This information may be presented in a figure or flow chart.
In this paper:
[ ] Yes
[ ] No
[ ] Unclear
Comment:
CEBM checklist for SR: Q3
CEBM for SR: Q3
Were the criteria used to select articles for inclusion appropriate?
What is best?
The inclusion or exclusion of studies in a systematic review should be clearly defined a priori. The eligibility criteria should specify the patients, interventions or exposures, and outcomes of interest. In many cases, the type of study design will also be a key component of the eligibility criteria.
Where do I find the information?
The Methods section should describe in detail the inclusion and exclusion criteria, which typically includes the study design.
In this paper:
[ ] Yes
[ ] No
[ ] Unclear
Comment:
CEBM checklist for SR: Q4
CEBM for SR: Q4
Were the included studies sufficiently valid for the type of question asked?
What is best?
The article should describe how the quality of each study was assessed using predetermined quality criteria appropriate to the type of clinical question (e.g., randomization, blinding, and completeness of follow-up).
Where do I find the information?
The Methods section should describe the assessment of quality and the criteria used. The Results section should provide information on the quality of the individual studies.
In this paper:
[ ] Yes
[ ] No
[ ] Unclear
Comment:
CEBM checklist for SR: Q5
CEBM for SR: Q5
Were the results similar from study to study?
What is best?
Ideally, the results of the different studies should be similar or homogeneous. If heterogeneity exists the authors may estimate whether the differences are significant (chi-square test). Possible reasons for the heterogeneity should be explored.
Where do I find the information?
The Results section should state whether the results are heterogeneous and discuss possible reasons. The forest plot should show the results of the chi-square test for heterogeneity and discuss reasons for heterogeneity, if present.
In this paper:
[ ] Yes
[ ] No
[ ] Unclear
Comment:
