论文部分内容阅读
目的采用Meta分析评价近10 a来中国中小学生交通伤害发生情况,为减少中小学生交通伤害提供依据。方法系统检索PubMed、中国期刊全文数据库(CNKI)、维普中文科技期刊全文数据库和万方数据资源系统中2000年至2010年发表的、有关中国中小学生交通伤害发生率的研究文献,参考疾病患病率或发病率研究质量评价准则评价文献质量,用广义倒方差模型估计交通伤害的Meta合并发生率,并对性别、年级、地区和病例定义标准执行亚组分析,采用敏感性分析评价研究类型和研究质量对结果的影响。结果符合入选标准文献共53篇,总样本量为2 023 082人,交通伤害人数和人次发生率分别为4.58%和5.65%。亚组分析显示,交通伤害人数发生率男生(5.35%)高于女生(3.55%),不同学校类型、地区、病例定义标准之间差异无统计学意义;交通伤害人次数男生发生率(5.00%)高于女生(4.37%),发达地区(0.10%)低于较发达地区(5.52%)和中等发达地区(8.56%),不同学校类型之间差异无统计学意义。采用1996年版伤害定义标准的交通伤害发生率(7.11%)高于采用2004年版伤害定义标准的发生率(0.58%)。通过敏感性分析删除文献质量评价得分最低和监测数据分析的文献之后,Meta分析的结果稍有改变。结论中国中小学生不同性别和不同经济发展水平地区间交通伤害发生率存在差别。
Objective To evaluate the incidence of traffic injuries among primary and secondary school students in China in the past 10 years by Meta-analysis and to provide basis for reducing traffic injuries among primary and secondary students. Methods The literature about PubMed, Chinese Journal Full-text Database (CNKI), VIP Chinese Science and Technology Periodical Full-text Database and Wanfang Data Resource System was searched from 2000 to 2010. The research literature on the incidence of traffic injuries among primary and secondary school students in China, Rate or incidence of quality of research evaluation criteria to evaluate the quality of literature, generalized inverse variance model to assess the incidence of traffic injury Meta incidence, and sex, grade, region and case definition of the standard implementation subgroup analysis using sensitivity analysis to evaluate the type of research and The impact of research quality on outcomes. The results were consistent with the inclusion criteria of a total of 53 articles, the total sample size of 2,023,082 people, the number of traffic injuries and the incidence was 4.58% and 5.65%. Subgroup analysis showed that the incidence of traffic injuries was higher in boys (5.35%) than girls (3.55%), and there was no significant difference among different school types, regions and case definition standards. The incidence of traffic injuries was 5.00% ) Was higher than that of girls (4.37%), that of developed areas (0.10%) was lower than that of more developed areas (5.52%) and moderately developed areas (8.56%). There was no significant difference between different school types. The incidence of traffic injuries using the 1996 version of injury definition (7.11%) was higher than that of the 2004 version (0.58%). Meta-analysis results have changed slightly after the literature with the lowest scores for document quality evaluation and monitoring data was deleted by sensitivity analysis. Conclusions There are differences in the incidence of traffic injuries between primary and middle school students in different regions of China and in different levels of economic development.