描述系统综述作者如何报告和处理具有潜在缺失试验参与者结果数据的参与者类别。
报告群体水平荟萃分析的系统评价的方法学调查。
我们包括50个Cochrane和50个非Cochrane系统评价的随机样本。其中,25在他们的方法部分报告了考虑10类缺失结果数据中至少有一类的计划；42在他们的结果中报告了，至少一个缺失数据类别的数据。方法和结果部分中报告最多的类别是“无法解释的随访损失”（方法部分中n=34，结果部分中n=6）。只有19人报告了一种在主要分析中处理缺失数据的方法，这通常是完整的案例分析。方法部分很少有评论（n=9）进行敏感性分析，以在荟萃分析水平上判断与缺失结果数据相关的偏倚风险；只有五个在结果部分提供了这些分析的结果。
大多数系统评价没有明确报告关于具有潜在缺失结果数据的试验参与者类别的足够信息，或在其主要分析中解决缺失数据。
To describe how systematic review authors report and address categories of participants with potential missing outcome data of trial participants.
Methodological survey of systematic reviews reporting a group-level meta-analysis.
We included a random sample of 50 Cochrane and 50 non-Cochrane systematic reviews. Of these, 25 reported in their methods section a plan to consider at least one of the 10 categories of missing outcome data; 42 reported in their results, data for at least one category of missing data. The most reported category in the methods and results sections was \"unexplained loss to follow-up\" (n = 34 in methods section and n = 6 in the results section). Only 19 reported a method to handle missing data in their primary analyses, which was most often complete case analysis. Few reviews (n = 9) reported in the methods section conducting sensitivity analysis to judge risk of bias associated with missing outcome data at the level of the meta-analysis; and only five of them presented the results of these analyses in the results section.
Most systematic reviews do not explicitly report sufficient information on categories of trial participants with potential missing outcome data or address missing data in their primary analyses.
PDF(Sci-hub)