不愧是导师给的《Meta分析SCI写作模板》！

Meta分析是一种系统性的研究方法，旨在综合和分析多个独立研究的结果，以获得更准确和可靠的结论。

通过整合已有的研究，Meta分析可以帮助我们了解某个特定主题的效果或关联性，并提供更全面的证据支持。

一般在研一，导师都会让我们去学习写一篇Meta分析。Meta分析相对简单，很适合医学科研入门的时候学，整个流程下来，像文献检索、文献筛选、统计分析、SCI写作，SCI选刊投稿等基础科研能力，都能得到锻炼！

部分Meta分析SCI的写作模板

《Meta分析SCI写作模板》

---

第一部分：前言部分

前言的介绍是非常重要的，前言部分一般是先对某些疾病或研究领域做一个介绍，包括其人的生活影响，现阶段的研究概况，以及研究的不足之处。目标是确立研究的必要性，数据和方法这一环要起承转合、很重要、很有意义，并且是有争议的，然后引出我们文章的目的。

前面部分介绍不同的描述有不同的写法，但是最后点名后续我们的内容，引出我们的目的一般是大同小异，下面就给大家介绍几种写法：

模板示例：
1️⃣ Considering the impact of the xxx risk potentially resulting from xxx, a number of studies have explored the association between xxx and xxx. However, individual studies have yielded inconsistent or conflicting findings, possibly caused by limitation associated with an individual study. To shed light on these contradictory results and to more precisely evaluate the relationship among xxx and xxx, we performed a meta-analysis of published studies.

2️⃣ Even though several studies comparing xxx and xxx have been reported, most are small series with conflicting results. It is still uncertain whether the benefits of xxx are restricted to improved xxx. We therefore systematically searched and analyzed the available literature to evaluate the efficiency, safety, and potential advantages of xxx compared with xxx.

3️⃣ The aims of this study are to understand analytically the epidemiological links and association between xxx and xxx among xxx.

---

第二部分：Search strategy

模板示例：
1️⃣ We did our best to include all xxx studies published until date, regarding the association between xxx and xxx. Eligible studies were found by searching the xxx database for relevant reports published between xxx and xxx.

2️⃣ A literature search was performed in xxx without restriction to regions, publication types, or languages. The primary sources were the electronic databases of xxx.

3️⃣ Trials were excluded if any of the following factors were identified: (1) insufficient information concerning evaluation rates, (2) animal trials, xxxxxxxx.

4️⃣ To identify eligible studies, the main search was conducted in the electronic databases xxx from inception through xxx, using various combinations of Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) and non-MeSH terms. The procedure was concluded by: (i) the perusal of the reference sections of all relevant studies, (ii) the hand search of key journals and annual abstracts from the major annual meetings in the field of xxx and (iii) contact with experts. The main search was completed independently by investigators. Any discrepancy was solved by consultation of an investigator, not involved in the initial procedure.

---

第三部分：Data extraction

模板示例：
1️⃣ Data from the included studies were extracted and summarized independently by two of the authors. Any disagreement was resolved by the adjudicating senior authors.

2️⃣ Data included the following: first author, publication year, country, source of control, each frequency of the case and control groups, xxxxxx.

3️⃣ Two reviewers extracted data independently using a predefined data extraction form. Disagreements were resolved by discussion or consensus with a third reviewer. The data extracted included the first author, study characteristics (i.e., year, duration, setting, and design), participant characteristics (i.e., mean age, sample size, and systemic therapy), xxx of the experimental and control group treatments; measured outcomes. For studies with insufficient information, the reviewers contacted the primary authors, when possible, to acquire and verify the data.

4️⃣ One investigator abstracted study design information, baseline population characteristics/interventional details, disease incidence, mortality, and harms data from all included studies into a standardized evidence table. A second investigator checked these data for accuracy. We resolved any disagreements through discussion.

第四部分：Quality assessment

Meta分析的结果质量是关键因素，但因为各类研究不同的文献质量可能参差不齐，因此需要在Meta分析中进行系统的文献质量评估。以下提供几种评价方法：

模板示例：
1️⃣ The methodological quality of RCTs was assessed by the Cochrane risk of bias tool. The methodological quality of retrospective studies was assessed by the modified Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS), which consists of three factors: patient selection, comparability of the study groups, and assessment of outcome. A score of 0-9 (allocated as stars) was allocated to each study except RCTs. RCTs and observational studies achieving six or more stars were considered to be of high quality.

2️⃣ Two review authors independently assessed the risk of bias using the Quality In Prognosis Studies (QUIPS) tool with minor adaptations. The tool includes 32 key items divided into 6 domains: 1) Study participation xxxxxx. For each study, each individual key item was assessed, and each domain was graded in one of the following categories of risk of bias, based on whether the domain fully complied, partly complied, did not comply at all, or did not report in respect of the characteristic expressed by the items: 1) Low risk of bias; 2) Moderate risk of bias; 3) High risk of bias; 4) Unknown.

3️⃣ Two investigators independently assessed each study’s quality as “good,” “fair,” or “poor” by using predefined quality criteria based on USPSTF methods. We excluded all poor-quality randomized, controlled trials and observational studies. In general, a good-quality study met all prespecified criteria. A fair-quality study did not meet at least 1 criterion but also did not have a known limitation that would invalidate its results. A poor-quality study had a fatal flaw or multiple important limitations. We supplemented the USPSTF criteria with criteria from the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence for the quality assessment of observational studies. We resolved any disagreements through discussion.

---

第五部分：Statistical analysis

本部分的目的是解释研究中用到的效应值 (如OR, RR, SMD, WMD等) 的计算方法，以及统计异质性分析方法。

模板示例：
1️⃣ Odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were assessed for determining the relationship between xxx and xxx.

2️⃣ The weighted mean difference (WMD) and odds ratio (OR) were used to compare continuous and dichotomous variables, respectively. All results were reported with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

3️⃣ For meta-analysis, the total effectiveness rates of dichotomous data were pooled using risk ratios (RRs). The aggregated results and 95% CIs for effect size were calculated using inverse-variance weighted random-effects meta-analysis. I² was used to assess heterogeneity across studies with I² values of 0%, 25%, 50% and 75% representing no, low, moderate and high heterogeneity, respectively. Meta-regression was conducted to investigate the potential covariates that might have substantial impacts on between-study heterogeneity. Influence analysis was also conducted to determine whether an individual study affected the aggregate result or not. Visual inspection of the funnel plot and Egger’s linear regression test was done to assess publication bias. Subgroup analyses were performed according to the type of study design.

---

第六部分：Results

本部分是展示Meta分析的主要结果，包括研究总体特点和Meta分析的统计结果。明确呈现每个效应值和置信区间，确保分析逻辑清晰。

第七部分：Discussion

讨论部分是对研究结果的意义及局限性的进一步分析，并结合既往文献做对比总结。

模板示例：
1️⃣ In this study, we analyzed the associations between xxx and xxx using a meta-analysis to obtain a powerful conclusion. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first meta-analysis providing comprehensive insights into the effects of xxx and risk associated with xxx.

2️⃣ Meta-analysis has been recognized as an effective method to answer a wide variety of clinical questions by summarizing and reviewing previously published, quantitative research.

3️⃣ Despite the fact that most of the trials had small sample sizes and poor methodological quality, analysis of the pooled data showed a consistently superior effect of xxx combined with xxx in terms of total effectiveness, when compared to the control groups.

4️⃣ The pooled data of xxx (postoperative outcomes) suggest that xxx was associated with shorter time to xxx. Given that there were differences in xxx (postoperative patient) management preferences and hospital discharge criteria, whether these potential benefits can be proved in future well-designed RCTs is not known.

5️⃣ However, some limitations in our meta-analysis should be mentioned. First, our results were based on unadjusted estimates; more accurate outcomes would result from adjustments for other confounders such as gender, age, body mass index, lifestyle, and so on. Second, the studies included in this analysis were insufficient, especially in terms of a subgroup analysis. Thus, potential publication bias is very likely to exist, in spite of no evidence obtained from our statistical tests. Third, language of studies was limited to English, which may result in unintentional language bias.

6️⃣ The present meta-analysis has the following limitations that must be taken into account. The main limitation is that all the included studies were retrospective, except for two RCTs with small sample sizes.

---

第八部分：Conclusions

结论部分对Meta分析的主要发现和未来研究方向进行总结。

模板示例：
1️⃣ In summary, our meta-analysis suggests that xxx are associated with xxx in the xxx population. Larger sample sizes of different ethnic populations are required to confirm our findings.

2️⃣ This meta-analysis indicates that xxx. Nevertheless, despite our rigorous methodology, the inherent limitations of included studies prevent us from reaching definitive conclusions. Future large-volume, well-designed RCTs with extensive follow-up are awaited to confirm and update the findings of this analysis.

3️⃣ While the evidence that xxx may be an effective treatment for xxx is encouraging, it is not conclusive due to the low methodological quality of the RCTs. Therefore, more high-quality RCTs, with low risk of bias and adequate sample sizes, are required to demonstrate its true effects.

自己平时也可以积累自己的SCI写作库，非常有价值。

——

最后，如果你想在2025年快速学会Meta分析，最好的办法还是边学边实践，学了马上应用，光学不用，永远也不知道你有没有学会。