目的评价微波治疗宫颈糜烂随机对照试验的方法学质量和报告质量。方法通过计算机检索、手工检索,全面收集与微波治疗宫颈糜烂有关的随机对照试验,按照Cochrane协作网推荐的评价方法对纳入研究进行方法学质量评价,按照CONSORT清单项目进行研究报告质量评价。结果最终纳入文献11篇,其中随机对照试验3篇,半随机对照试验8篇。评价结果显示,纳入文献方法学质量和报告质量普遍较低,其中C级为10篇, CONSORT评分最高仅17分。结论以往的微波治疗宫颈糜烂随机对照试验研究存在不同程度的方法学质量缺陷,故其结论存在发生选择性偏倚、实施性偏倚、测量性偏倚以及减员性偏倚的高度可能性。而低的研究报告质量又会严重影响读者对研究结果真实性、重要性及实用性的正确理解和评价。因此期待设计严密、实施科学、报告完整的随机对照研究出现。 Objective To evaluate the methodological quality and reporting quality of randomized controlled trials of microwave treatment of cervical erosion. Methods Randomized controlled trials on microwave treatment of cervical erosion were collected by computer and manual search. The methodological quality was evaluated according to the method recommended by Cochrane Collaboration, and the quality of research report was evaluated according to the CONSORT checklist. The results were finally included in the literature 11, including 3 randomized controlled trials, 8 randomized controlled trials. The evaluation results showed that the quality of the included methodologies and the quality of the reports were generally low, of which 10 were in C-level and only 17 in CONSORT. CONCLUSIONS: In the past, randomized controlled trials of microwave therapies for cervical erosion had different methodological quality defects. Therefore, there was a high possibility of occurrence of selective bias, implementation bias, measurement bias and downsizing bias. The low quality of the research report will seriously affect the readers’ correct understanding and evaluation of the authenticity, importance and practicality of the research results. So look forward to a well-designed, scientific implementation, report complete randomized controlled studies appear.