meta分析

教大家如何做一篇meta-4

NOS量表的制作

一、理论讲解

当我们提取完snp的原始文献的数据后,我们最好对原始文献进行质量评价(这是由病例-对照研究和cohort研究的设计特点决定的)。就是我们都来当判官,给文章打分和点赞,看他是否符合NOS,符合就点赞,给五星。

我们先看看例子:他汀类药物预防大肠癌,业内牛刊jco附件的 质量评价表

Supplementary Table 3 Quality assessment of the included studies

Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for assessing the quality of studies in meta-analysis

  Selection       Comparability Outcome      
Study Represent Selection of Ascertain Demonstration that Comparability of Assessme Was follow-up   Qua
  ativeness the non ment of outcome of interest cohorts on the nt of long enough for Adequacy lity
  of the exposed exposure was not present at basis of the outcome outcomes to of follow scor
  exposed cohort   start of study design or   occur up of e
  cohort       analysis     cohorts  
Krens et al,2014     ★ ★★ 8
Ishikawa et al,2014   ★★   7
Cardwell et al,2014     6
Zanders et al,2013   7
Mace et al,2013   ★★   7
Ma et al,2013   ★★ 8
Nielsen et al,2012   ★★ 8
Lakha et al,2012   ★★   7
Ng et al,2011   ★★   7
Siddiqui  et al,2009    ★     5

Note: A study can be awarded a maximum of one star for each numbered item within the Selection and Outcome categories. A maximum of two stars can be given for Comparability.

 

猴哥自己文章的质量评价表

Table S1. Results of quality assessment using the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale for case-control studies

Study Selection       Comparability Exposure     Scores
  Adequate

definition of cases

Representat-

iveness of

the cases

Selection of con-

trols

Definition of con-

trols

Control for

important factor a

Ascertain-

ment of

exposure

Same method

of ascertain-

ment for cases

and controls

Non-

response

rate

 
Kwang 2006 ☆☆ - 8
Anvesha Srivastava 2008 ☆☆ 9
Nopparat 2012 - ☆☆ - 7
Li 2005 - 7
Wang 2005 - 7
Matsubayashi 2005 - 7
Suzuk 2008 8
Yang 2009 - 7
Ivan Nisevic 2008 ☆☆ 9

a A maximum of 2 stars can be allotted in this category, one for age, the other for other controlled factors.

 

二、原理

大家对照着表看看,好好琢磨琢磨,真正做meta的时候才能明白吧!!!这里列举猴哥收集的中文版的相关内容,睡觉的时候看看,是必备催眠佳品。

队列研究的NOS中文版

  • 队列的选择:

(1)暴露队列的代表性:

  • 很好的代表性 *
  • 较好的代表性 *
  • 代表性差,如选择志愿者、护士等
  • 未描述队列的来源

(2)非暴露队列的选择:

  • 与暴露队列来自同一人群,如同一社区 *
  • 与暴露队列来自不同的人群
  • 未描述来源

(3)暴露的确定:

  • 严格确定的记录(如外科的记录) *
  • 结构式问卷调查 *
  • 自己的记录
  • 未描述

(4)研究开始时没有研究对象已经发生研究的疾病:

  • 是 *
  • 可比性

暴露队列和非暴露队列的可比性(设计和分析阶段)

  • 根据最重要的因素选择和分析对照 *
  • 根据其他的重要因素(例如第二重要因素)选择和分析对照 *

(可以理解为是否对重要的混杂因素进行了校正)

  • 结果
  • 结果的测定方法:
  • 独立的、盲法测定或评估 *
  • 根据可靠地记录 *
  • 自己的记录
  • 未描述
  • 对于所研究的疾病,随访时间是否足够长?
  • 是的 *
  • 否(时间太短,多数未发生所研究的疾病)
  • 随访的完整性
  • 随访完整,对所有的研究对象均随访到 *
  • 随访率>80%(评价者自己可以确定一个合适的随访率),少数失访,失访小并对失访者进行了描述分析 *
  • 随访率<80%,对失访者没有进行描述
  • 未描述

NEWCASTLE - OTTAWA QUALITY ASSESSMENT SCALE  FOR CASE CONTROL STUDIES

Note: A study can be awarded a maximum of one star for each numbered item within the Selection and Exposure categories. A maximum of two stars can be given for Comparability

Selection

1) Is the case definition adequate?

  1. a) yes, with independent validation ¯
  2. b) yes, eg record linkage or based on self reports
  3. c) no description

2) Representativeness of the cases

  1. a) consecutive or obviously representative series of cases ¯
  2. b) potential for selection biases or not stated

3) Selection of Controls

  1. a) community controls ¯
  2. b) hospital controls
  3. c) no description

4) Definition of Controls

  1. a) no history of disease (endpoint) ¯
  2. b) no description of source

Comparability

1) Comparability of cases and controls on the basis of the design or analysis

  1. a) study controls for _______________ (Select the most important factor.) ¯
  2. b) study controls for any additional factor ¯(This criteria could be modified to indicate specific control for a second important factor.)

 

Exposure

1) Ascertainment of exposure

  1. a) secure record (eg surgical records) ¯
  2. b) structured interview where blind to case/control status ¯
  3. c) interview not blinded to case/control status
  4. d) written self report or medical record only
  5. e) no description

2) Same method of ascertainment for cases and controls

  1. a) yes ¯
  2. b) no

3) Non-Response rate

  1. a) same rate for both groups ¯
  2. b) non respondents described
  3. c) rate different and no designation

 

三、实战分析

1.数据如下:具体指南如下:

  1. 下面几篇文章,我们的评分如下:

Study quality of included studies based on the Newcastle-Ottawa scale

3.1 Study quality of case-control studies

Author Is the case definition adequate? Representativeness of the Cases Selection of Controls Definition of Controls Comparability of Cases and Controls on the Basis of the Design or Analysis Ascertainment of exposure Same method of ascertainment for cases and controls Non-Response rate Total scores
Elbendary MA 2009 ☆☆ 6
Polsky JY 2005 ★★ 7
Zambon JP 2010 ☆☆ 6
Zedan H 2010 ☆☆ 5

3.2 Study quality of cohort studies

Author Representativeness of the exposed cohort Selection of the non exposed cohort Ascertainment of exposure Demonstration that outcome of interest was not present at start of study

 

Comparability of cohorts on the basis of the design or analysis Assessment of outcome Was follow-up long enough for outcomes to occur Adequacy of follow up of cohorts Total scores
Bacon CG 2006 ★★ 8
Feldman HA 2000 ★★ 6
Gades NM 2005 ★★ 7
Shiri R 2005 ★★ 6
  1. 总的来说,这个评分差异很大,但求双人统一评价和标准严格。或者你采用更主观一点的方式评价:

猴哥的一点拙见,仅供参考

3分以上的文章,给7分及以上

3分以下的文章,给6分及以下

 

拓展知识:

SNPmeta

SNPMETA1

SNPMETA2_检索式

SNPMETA3_索要原始文献+数据提取

 

教你如何做一篇meta分析1_

教你如何做一篇meta分析2_

教你如何做一篇meta分析3_哈温平衡的计算

教你如何做一篇meta分析4_NOS量表的制作

 

网状emta分析必备技能

网状emta分析必备技能1

网状meta分析必备技能2_R软件gemtc包

网状Meta分析必备技能3_数据初始值的设定

网状Meta分析必备技能4_Gemtc实现生存分析

网状meta分析必备技能5_HR风险比

网状meta分析必备技能6_R+Rstudio运用meta包做简单meta分析

网状meta分析必备技能7_使用R、GeMTC和STATA软件实现连续变量的网状Meta分析

 

网状meta分析stata简易教程

NMA(网状meta分析)stata简易教程(1)

NMA(网状meta分析)stata简易教程(2)网状图

NMA(网状meta分析)stata简易教程(3)贡献图

NMA(网状meta分析)stata简易教程(4)漏斗图的制作

NMA(网状meta分析)stata简易教程(5)排序图的制作

 

诊断性meta分析简单实现

诊断性meta分析简单实现(1)之revman

诊断性meta分析简单实现(2)

诊断性meta分析简单实现(3)

诊断性meta分析简单实现(4)_meta-disc

诊断性meta分析简单实现(5)_结果的展示和解读

 

其他

meta分析统计方法-随机对照试验的风险评估rob

生物标记物(基因)联合诊断模型的stata实现ROC(AUC)

生物标记物(基因)联合诊断模型的R实现ROC(AUC)

(0)