Abstract：
Neurosurgeons are inundated with the Herculean task to keep abreast with the rapid pace at which clinical research is proliferating. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses (SRMAs) have consequently surged in popularity because when executed properly, they constitute the highest level of evidence, and may save busy neurosurgeons many hours of combing the literature. Well-executed SRMAs may prove instructive for clinical practice, but poorly conducted reviews sow confusion and may potentially cause harm. Unfortunately, many SRMAs within neurosurgery are relatively lackluster in methodological rigor. When neurosurgeons apply the results of an SRMA to patient care, they should start by evaluating the extent to which the employed methods have likely protected against misleading results. The present article aims to educate the reader about how to interpret an SRMA, to assess the potential relevance of its results in the special context of the neurosurgical patient population.
摘要：
神经外科医生被艰巨的任务所淹没，以跟上临床研究迅速发展的步伐。因此，系统评价和荟萃分析(SRMA)的受欢迎程度激增，因为如果执行得当，它们构成了最高级别的证据，并且可以节省忙碌的神经外科医生许多小时的文献梳理。执行良好的SRMA可能对临床实践具有指导意义，但是不良的审查会造成混乱，并可能造成伤害。不幸的是,神经外科中的许多SRMA在方法上的严谨性相对不足。当神经外科医生将SRMA的结果应用于患者护理时，他们应该首先评估所采用的方法在多大程度上可以防止误导性结果。本文旨在教育读者如何解释SRMA，评估其结果在神经外科患者人群的特殊背景下的潜在相关性。
