Quality assessment of systematic reviews/Meta-analyses correlated to levofloxacin for MDR-TB
10.3969/j.issn.1006-0111.2016.06.016
- VernacularTitle:左氧氟沙星治疗耐多药肺结核疗效的系统评价／荟萃分析的质量评价
- Author:
Suxin WAN
1
;
Daoqiu HUANG
;
Lei YU
;
Yi XIANG
;
Wei FANG
Author Information
1. 重庆市三峡中心医院 药学部
- Keywords:
levofloxacin;
multidrug-resistant tuberculosis;
systematic review;
Meta analysis
- From:
Journal of Pharmaceutical Practice
2016;34(6):546-551
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective Assessing the publication and quality of systematic reviews/Meta-analyses correlated to levofloxa-cin for MDR-TB in China to promote the rational use of levofloxacin .Methods A literature retrieving was made in CNKI/VIP/WanFang Med-online/CBM and other databases ,to collect literatures published in the nearly 10 years correlated to sys-tematic reviews/Meta-analyses of levofloxacin for MDR-TB .Two researchers screened the literatures ,extracted data and as-sessed the quality of literatures independently ,and then cross-checked .OQAQ and AMSTAR scale were used to qualify the methodological quality of included studies ,PRISMA scale was used to evaluate the report quality .Results Fourteen literatures were included ,of which 4 were Meta analysis and 10 were systematic reviews .OQAQ methodological quality rating up to 7 points and the lowest was 3 .5 points ,the average was 6 .21 points .The highest rate of in line with AMSTAR were entry 1 and 9 ,and the compliance rate of entries 2 ,4 ,8 ,10 were good as well .PRISMA report quality scored up to 21 points and the low-est was 13 .5 points ,the average was 19 .29 points .The main problems were:incomprehensive search strategy and scrope , none specific inclusion and exclusion criteria ,unreported selection bias and no evaluation of the quality of part of the included studies .Conclusion The publication and quality of systematic reviews/Meta-analyses correlated to levofloxacin for MDR-TB in China were good ,but still need further improvement .
