【摘要】 目的对川崎病治疗相关的系统评价进行再评价。方法计算机检索Cochrane图书馆、Pubmed、EMbase、CBM、CNKI及Wanfang数据库。搜集川崎病治疗相关的系统评价,检索时限均为建库起至2020年2月。由2位研究者筛选文献、提取资料,并对纳入的系统评价运用AMSTAR2工具评估其方法学偏倚,以及运用GRADE系统评价结局指标的证据质量。结果共纳入16篇系统评价文献。AMSTAR2工具评价结果显示,12篇系统评价方法学质量为极低,4篇为低,符合情况欠佳的包括条目2、3、7、10、12、14、15、16。GRADE评价结果显示,纳入系统评价的105个结局指标中无高级的证据质量;低级证据质量为49个,占46.7%;极低级证据质量为40个,占38.1%;中级证据质量为16个,占15.2%。导致质量降级的原因包括局限性、不一致性、不精确性及发表偏倚。结论目前针对川崎病治疗的系统评价的方法学质量和结局指标证据质量整体较低。更多还原

【Abstract】 Objective To overview the systematic reviews(SR)of Kawasaki disease(KD).Methods The Cochrane library,Pubmed,EMbase,CBM,CNKI and Wanfang databases were searched by computer form inception to February 2020.Two reviewers independently screened literature and extracted data.AMSTAR2 tool was used to assess the methodology bias of included studies,and GRADE system was used to assess the evidence quality of the included systematic evaluation outcome index.Results A total of 16 SR literatures were included.The AMSTAR2 tool evaluation results showed that 12 literatures were of very low quality,and 4 literatures were of low quality.The items with poor compliance included items 2,3,7,10,12,14,15 and 16.The GRADE assess results show that among the 105 outcome indicators included in SR,there was no advanced evidence quality,49 were low evidence quality,accounting for 46.7%,40 were extremely low,accounting for 38.1%,and 16 were intermediate,accounting for 15.2%.Reasons for quality degradation included limitations,inconsistencies,inaccuracies,and publication bias.Conclusion At present,the methodological quality of systematic reviews of KD treatment is generally low,and the evidence quality is also low.更多还原