Literature DB >> 21487488

Meta-analysis in medical research.

A B Haidich1.   

Abstract

The objectives of this paper are to provide an introduction to meta-analysis and to discuss the rationale for this type of research and other general considerations. Methods used to produce a rigorous meta-analysis are highlighted and some aspects of presentation and interpretation of meta-analysis are discussed.Meta-analysis is a quantitative, formal, epidemiological study design used to systematically assess previous research studies to derive conclusions about that body of research. Outcomes from a meta-analysis may include a more precise estimate of the effect of treatment or risk factor for disease, or other outcomes, than any individual study contributing to the pooled analysis. The examination of variability or heterogeneity in study results is also a critical outcome. The benefits of meta-analysis include a consolidated and quantitative review of a large, and often complex, sometimes apparently conflicting, body of literature. The specification of the outcome and hypotheses that are tested is critical to the conduct of meta-analyses, as is a sensitive literature search. A failure to identify the majority of existing studies can lead to erroneous conclusions; however, there are methods of examining data to identify the potential for studies to be missing; for example, by the use of funnel plots. Rigorously conducted meta-analyses are useful tools in evidence-based medicine. The need to integrate findings from many studies ensures that meta-analytic research is desirable and the large body of research now generated makes the conduct of this research feasible.

Entities:  

Keywords:  bias; evidence-based medicine; meta-analysis; quality; randomized clinical trial; systematic review

Year:  2010        PMID: 21487488      PMCID: PMC3049418     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hippokratia        ISSN: 1108-4189            Impact factor:   0.471


  66 in total

1.  Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Julian P T Higgins; Simon G Thompson
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2002-06-15       Impact factor: 2.373

2.  Relative citation impact of various study designs in the health sciences.

Authors:  Nikolaos A Patsopoulos; Apostolos A Analatos; John P A Ioannidis
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2005-05-18       Impact factor: 56.272

Review 3.  The case of the misleading funnel plot.

Authors:  Joseph Lau; John P A Ioannidis; Norma Terrin; Christopher H Schmid; Ingram Olkin
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2006-09-16

4.  Review: rosiglitazone increases risk of MI but does not differ from other drugs for CV death in type 2 diabetes.

Authors:  Mark A Hlatky; Dena M Bravata
Journal:  Evid Based Med       Date:  2007-12

5.  Empirical evidence of bias in treatment effect estimates in controlled trials with different interventions and outcomes: meta-epidemiological study.

Authors:  Lesley Wood; Matthias Egger; Lise Lotte Gluud; Kenneth F Schulz; Peter Jüni; Douglas G Altman; Christian Gluud; Richard M Martin; Anthony J G Wood; Jonathan A C Sterne
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2008-03-03

6.  A method for the meta-analysis of mutually exclusive binary outcomes.

Authors:  Thomas A Trikalinos; Ingram Olkin
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2008-09-20       Impact factor: 2.373

7.  Detecting and describing heterogeneity in meta-analysis.

Authors:  R J Hardy; S G Thompson
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1998-04-30       Impact factor: 2.373

8.  Predictive modeling and heterogeneity of baseline risk in meta-analysis of individual patient data.

Authors:  T A Trikalinos; J P Ioannidis
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2001-03       Impact factor: 6.437

9.  Rosiglitazone evaluated for cardiovascular outcomes in oral agent combination therapy for type 2 diabetes (RECORD): a multicentre, randomised, open-label trial.

Authors:  Philip D Home; Stuart J Pocock; Henning Beck-Nielsen; Paula S Curtis; Ramon Gomis; Markolf Hanefeld; Nigel P Jones; Michel Komajda; John J V McMurray
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2009-06-06       Impact factor: 79.321

Review 10.  The effects of excluding patients from the analysis in randomised controlled trials: meta-epidemiological study.

Authors:  Eveline Nüesch; Sven Trelle; Stephan Reichenbach; Anne W S Rutjes; Elizabeth Bürgi; Martin Scherer; Douglas G Altman; Peter Jüni
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2009-09-07
View more
  182 in total

1.  Limitations of accessibility of the talar dome with different open surgical approaches.

Authors:  Yantarat Sripanich; Graham Dekeyser; Jesse Steadman; Chamnanni Rungprai; Justin Haller; Charles L Saltzman; Alexej Barg
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2020-06-29       Impact factor: 4.342

Review 2.  Application of Global Positioning System and Microsensor Technology in Competitive Rugby League Match-Play: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Authors:  Joanne Hausler; Mark Halaki; Rhonda Orr
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  2016-04       Impact factor: 11.136

Review 3.  (99m)Tc-Annexin A5 quantification of apoptotic tumor response: a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical imaging trials.

Authors:  Tarik Z Belhocine; Francis G Blankenberg; Marina S Kartachova; Larry W Stitt; Jean-Luc Vanderheyden; Frank J P Hoebers; Christophe Van de Wiele
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2015-08-16       Impact factor: 9.236

Review 4.  Deglutition disorders as a consequence of head and neck cancer therapies: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Isabela Porto de Toledo; Leticia Lopes Quirino Pantoja; Karen Fontes Luchesi; Daniele Xavier Assad; Graziela De Luca Canto; Eliete Neves Silva Guerra
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2019-06-22       Impact factor: 3.603

5.  Audiovisual multisensory integration in individuals with autism spectrum disorder: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Jacob I Feldman; Kacie Dunham; Margaret Cassidy; Mark T Wallace; Yupeng Liu; Tiffany G Woynaroski
Journal:  Neurosci Biobehav Rev       Date:  2018-10-01       Impact factor: 8.989

6.  Methodological Challenges to the Evaluation of Interventions for Foster/Kinship Carers and Children: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Adam Dickes; Jacqueline Kemmis-Riggs; John McAloon
Journal:  Clin Child Fam Psychol Rev       Date:  2018-06

Review 7.  Conducting and interpreting high-quality systematic reviews and meta-analyses.

Authors:  Rajat Kalra; Pankaj Arora; Charity Morgan; Fadi G Hage; Ami E Iskandrian; Navkaranbir S Bajaj
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2016-08-02       Impact factor: 5.952

8.  Evidence based review of type 2 diabetes prevention and management in low and middle income countries.

Authors:  Aimee Afable; Nidhi Shree Karingula
Journal:  World J Diabetes       Date:  2016-05-25

9.  Basics of meta-analysis.

Authors:  Ayesha Shah; Michael P Jones; Gerald J Holtmann
Journal:  Indian J Gastroenterol       Date:  2020-11-04

Review 10.  Practical recommendations to conduct a neuroimaging meta-analysis for neuropsychiatric disorders.

Authors:  Masoud Tahmasian; Amir A Sepehry; Fateme Samea; Tina Khodadadifar; Zahra Soltaninejad; Nooshin Javaheripour; Habibolah Khazaie; Mojtaba Zarei; Simon B Eickhoff; Claudia R Eickhoff
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2019-08-04       Impact factor: 5.038

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.