期刊文献+

营养学队列研究证据质量分级系统NutriGrade的解读

Interpretation of Nutri Grade:a grading system to assess the quality of evidence for cohort studies on nutrition
原文传递
导出
摘要 针对营养学研究个性化需求,Schwingshackl研究组制定了NutriGrade分级系统,独立评估营养学随机对照试验和队列研究的证据质量,旨在总结不同营养因素和结果的关联或影响,满足证据使用者的具体需要,其优势在于分类新颖、可量化性、独立性和针对性,且具较好的一致性、公平性、可靠性和可行性。相比于随机对照试验,开展前瞻性队列研究在营养领域可行性更高。队列研究的证据质量分级涉及8个条目:(1)偏倚风险、研究质量和研究局限性;(2)精确性;(3)异质性;(4)间接性;(5)发表偏倚;(6)资助偏倚;(7)效应量;(8)剂量-反应关系。综合上述各条目评价结果可将证据质量划分为高(8~10)、中(<8)、低(<6)和极低(<4)四个等级。本文旨在介绍Nutri Grade分级系统的基本原理、具体内容及应用方法,并列举实例,为相关研究者提供参考。 In response to the specific requirements of nutrition research,Schwingshackl’s research group developed the NutriGrade grading system,which independently assessed the quality of evidence in randomized controlled trials and cohort studies in nutrition,aiming to summarize the associations or effects between different nutritional factors and outcomes and meet the specific needs of evidence users.It has the advantages of novel classification,quantifiability,independence and pertinence,and it has better consistency,fairness,reliability and feasibility.Well-designed prospective cohort studies are more feasible in the field of nutrition than randomized controlled trials.The grading of the evidence quality for cohort studies included the following eight items:a)risk of bias,study quality,and study limitations;b)precision;c)heterogeneity;d)directness;e)publication bias;f)funding bias;g)effect size;and h)dose-response.Based on the evaluation results of the above items,the evidence quality could be divided into four grades:high(8-10),moderate(<8),low(<6),and very low(<4).The purpose of this paper was to introduce the basic principles,specific contents,and application methods of the NutriGrade grading system for cohort studies and cite examples to provide references for relevant researchers.
作者 商雪 吴亚楠 鄂芬芬 卢存存 后亮瑛 郭康乐 王艳 周丽营 徐梦 杨超群 杨克虎 李秀霞 SHANG Xue;WU Yanan;E Fenfen;LU Cuncun;HOU Liangying;GUO Kangle;WANG Yan;ZHOU Liying;XU Meng;YANG Chaoqun;YANG Kehu;LI Xiuxia(Evidence Based Social Science Research Center/Health Technology Assessment Center,School of Public Health,Lanzhou University,Lanzhou 730000,P.R.China;Key Laboratory of Evidence Based Medicine and Knowledge Translation of Gansu Province,Lanzhou 730000,P.R.China;Evidence Based Medicine Center,School of Basic Medical Sciences,Lanzhou University,Lanzhou 730000,P.R.China;Institute of Basic Research in Clinical Medicine,China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences,Beijing 100700,P.R.China)
出处 《中国循证医学杂志》 CSCD 北大核心 2022年第11期1348-1357,共10页 Chinese Journal of Evidence-based Medicine
基金 国家自然科学基金项目(编号:72074103) 中央高校基本科研业务费专项项目(编号:lzujbky-2021-ct06、lzujbky-2021-kb22) 甘肃省软科学项目(编号:20CX9ZA109)。
关键词 META分析 队列研究 证据分级 营养 NutriGrade Meta-analysis Cohort study Evidence classification Nutrition NutriGrade
  • 相关文献

参考文献4

二级参考文献37

  • 1Altman DG. Systematic reviews of evaluations of prognostic variables. BMJ, 2001, 323(7306): 224-228.
  • 2Riley RD, Hayden JA, Steyerberg EW, et al. Prognosis Research Strategy (PROGRESS)2: Prognostic Factor Research. PLoS Med, 2013, 10(2): e1001380.
  • 3Hemingway H, Croft P, Perel P, et al. Prognosis research strategy (PROGRESS)1: A framework for researching clinical outcomes. BMJ, 2013, 346(fed05 1): e5595-e5595.
  • 4Hingorania D, Windt D, Riley RD, et al. Prognosis research strategy (PROGRESS)4: Stratified medicine research. BMJ. 2013, 346(fed 5): e5793-e5793.
  • 5Steyerberg EW, Moons KGM, van der Windt DA, et al. Prognosis research strategy (PROGRESS)3: Prognostic Model Research. PLoS Med, 2013, 10(2): e1001381.
  • 6Iorio A, Spencer FA, Falavigna M, et al. Use of GRADE for assessment of evidence about prognosis: rating confidence in estimates of event rates in broad categories of patients. BMJ, 2015, 16(350): h870.
  • 7Lopes LC, Spencer Fa, Neumann I, et al. Bleeding risk in atrial fibrillation patients taking vitamin K antagonists: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Pharmacol Ther, 2013, 94(3): 367-375.
  • 8Hayden J, van der Windt D, Cartwright JL, et al. Assessing bias in studies of prognostic factors. Ann Intern Med, 2013, 158(4): 280-286.
  • 9Busse JW, Guyatt GH. Tool to Assess Risk of Bias in Case Control Studies [Internet]. Available at: http://distillercer.com/resources/methodological-resources/risk-of-bias-in-case-control-studies/.
  • 10Reeves BC, Deeks JJ, Higgins JP, et al. Including non-randomized studies. In: Higgins JP, Green s, editors. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2010, 391-432.

共引文献190

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部