顶级普通医学期刊和CDSR中基于RCT的介入荟萃分析的发表滞后：一项荟萃流行病学研究的方案
Publication lag in interventional, RCT-based meta-analyses within top-tier general medical journals and the CDSR: a protocol for a meta-epidemiological study.
摘要(中文译文)
系统综述和meta分析是临床指南的基石，然而其有效性取决于所纳入证据的时效性。在顶级综合医学期刊和Cochrane系统综述数据库（CDSR）中，以末次检索日期至在线发表之间的间隔来衡量的发表滞后情况仍不明确。现有数据大多已过时，且缺乏对相关因素的探索。本研究旨在通过量化顶级综合医学期刊和CDSR中当前的发表滞后情况并识别其独立预测因素来填补这一空白。本meta流行病学研究将分析2023年至2025年间发表于顶级综合医学期刊和CDSR中基于随机对照试验（RCT）的干预性meta分析。我们将计算发表滞后时间，评估对AMSTAR 2时效性标准的依从性，并比较顶级综合医学期刊与CDSR之间的表现。将采用多变量回归分析来确定与发表延迟程度相关的独立因素。本研究将系统量化顶级综合医学期刊和CDSR中发表滞后的现状及其决定因素。由于我们依赖公开可获取的日期，无法细致区分作者相关修改与编辑处理时长，这一局限性可能引入信息偏倚。具体而言，如果某些期刊吸引更复杂的综述而需要大量作者修改，所观察到的滞后可能高估编辑效率低下的程度。反之，高效的编辑工作流程可能掩盖作者方面的长期延迟。通过认识这些潜在的偏倚方向，我们的研究结果将为评估证据时效性提供一个更细致、更具可操作性的框架。https://osf.io/cjtk。
Abstract
Systematic reviews and meta-analyses serve as the cornerstone of clinical guidelines, yet their validity hinges on the currency of the included evidence. The publication lag measured as the interval from the last search date to online publication remains unclear in top-tier general medical journals and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR). Existing data are largely outdated and lack exploration of associated factors. Our study aims to fill this gap by quantifying the current publication lag in top-tier general medical journals and the CDSR and identifying its independent predictors. This meta-epidemiological study will analyze interventional, RCT-based meta-analyses published in top-tier general medical journals and the CDSR between 2023 and 2025. We will calculate the publication lag, assess compliance with AMSTAR 2 timeliness standards, and compare the performance between top-tier general medical journals and the CDSR. Multivariable regression analysis will be employed to determine independent factors which associated with the extent of publication delay. Our study will systematically quantify the current status and determinants of publication lag in top-tier general medical journals and the CDSR. While our reliance on publicly available dates precludes a granular distinction between author-related revisions and editorial processing durations, this limitation may introduce information bias. Specifically, if certain journals attract more complex reviews requiring extensive author revisions, the observed lag may overstate editorial inefficiency. Conversely, high-performance editorial workflows might mask prolonged author delays. By acknowledging these potential directions of bias, our findings will provide a more nuanced, actionable framework for assessing evidence currency. https://osf.io/cjtk.
如何引用
AMA
Jia Song, Qin Wang, Chongyang Zhao, Li Li, Deying Kang. Publication lag in interventional, RCT-based meta-analyses within top-tier general medical journals and the CDSR: a protocol for a meta-epidemiological study.. Frontiers in medicine. 2026; doi:10.3389/fmed.2026.1803578.
APA
Jia Song, Qin Wang, Chongyang Zhao, Li Li, Deying Kang (2026). Publication lag in interventional, RCT-based meta-analyses within top-tier general medical journals and the CDSR: a protocol for a meta-epidemiological study.. Frontiers in medicine. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2026.1803578
GB/T 7714
Jia Song, Qin Wang, Chongyang Zhao, Li Li, Deying Kang. Publication lag in interventional, RCT-based meta-analyses within top-tier general medical journals and the CDSR: a protocol for a meta-epidemiological study.[J]. Frontiers in medicine, 2026 doi:10.3389/fmed.2026.1803578.
在 PubMed增强版 阅读全文
翻译全文 · AI 文献问答 · PDF 原文下载 · 引用导出