Radon Interventions Around the Globe

These are data from 48 selected peer-reviewed articles and 13 other grey literature regarding effectiveness of radon mitigation systems installed in residential or model houses. Some of the documents described also the factors that need to be considered in installing the mitigation systems. The screened and critically appraised data were synthesized data using PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analysis) 2009 checklist. We assessed quality by using Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for the experimental and Hamilton tool for the non-experimental and uncontrolled studies. We included 61 pieces of literature for the final review. 13 were various types of documents, and 48 were peer-reviewed articles. Among the latter, seventeen were experimental studies, three reviews, 22 quantitative, one case-control study, four case studies, one qualitative research. Among the experimental studies, fifteen were of high quality and two of moderate quality. Among 22 non-experimental quantitative studies, 15 were of high quality and 7 of moderate quality; all the case and qualitative studies were of high quality.

本数据集源自48篇经过筛选的同行评议论文，以及13篇灰色文献（grey literature），内容围绕住宅或样板房内安装的氡气减排系统（radon mitigation systems）的有效性展开。部分文献还阐述了安装该减排系统所需考量的各项因素。本研究采用系统综述与Meta分析优先报告条目（PRISMA，Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analysis）2009版清单，对经过筛选与严格评价的数据进行了整合。质量评价环节中，实验性研究采用Cochrane偏倚风险工具（Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool）评估，非实验性与非对照研究则采用汉密尔顿工具（Hamilton tool）进行评价。本次最终综述共纳入61篇文献，其中13篇为各类灰色文献，48篇为同行评议论文。在这48篇同行评议论文中，包含17项实验性研究、3篇综述、22项定量研究、1项病例对照研究、4项案例研究以及1项质性研究。上述实验性研究中，15项质量等级为高，2项为中等；在22项非实验性定量研究中，15项质量等级为高，7项为中等；所有案例研究与质性研究的质量等级均为高。