Literature DB >> 21719182

Systematic reviews and meta-analysis: scientific rationale and interpretation.

Ignacio Ferreira González1, Gerard Urrútia, Pablo Alonso-Coello.   

Abstract

Systematic reviews represent a specific type of medical research in which the units of analysis are the original primary studies. They are essential tools in synthesizing available scientific information, increasing the validity of the conclusions of primary studies, and identifying areas for future research. They are also indispensable for the practice of evidence-based medicine and the medical decision-making process. However, conducting high quality systematic reviews is not easy and they can sometimes be difficult to interpret. This special article presents the rationale for carrying out and interpreting systematic reviews and uses a hypothetical example to draw attention to key-points.
Copyright © 2011 Sociedad Española de Cardiología. Published by Elsevier Espana. All rights reserved.

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21719182     DOI: 10.1016/j.recesp.2011.03.029

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Rev Esp Cardiol        ISSN: 0300-8932            Impact factor:   4.753


  16 in total

1.  Survival outcome and perioperative complication related to neoadjuvant chemotherapy with carboplatin and paclitaxel for advanced ovarian cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Hiroko Machida; Hideki Tokunaga; Koji Matsuo; Noriomi Matsumura; Yoichi Kobayashi; Tsutomu Tabata; Masanori Kaneuchi; Satoru Nagase; Mikio Mikami
Journal:  Eur J Surg Oncol       Date:  2019-12-04       Impact factor: 4.424

2.  Enhancing the quality and transparency of systematic reviews.

Authors:  Herney Andrés García-Perdomo
Journal:  Colomb Med (Cali)       Date:  2018-12-30

3.  Standardizing effect size from linear regression models with log-transformed variables for meta-analysis.

Authors:  Miguel Rodríguez-Barranco; Aurelio Tobías; Daniel Redondo; Elena Molina-Portillo; María José Sánchez
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2017-03-17       Impact factor: 4.615

Review 4.  Network meta-analysis, a new statistical technique at urologists' disposal to improve decision making.

Authors:  Herney Andres Garcia-Perdomo
Journal:  Int Braz J Urol       Date:  2018 May-Jun       Impact factor: 1.541

5.  Ethical conflicts in nursing care in the prison context.

Authors:  P González-Gálvez; M Sánchez-Roig; A Coll Cámara; O Canet Vélez; J Roca Llobet
Journal:  Rev Esp Sanid Penit       Date:  2018 Sep-Dec

6.  An integrative methodology based on protein-protein interaction networks for identification and functional annotation of disease-relevant genes applied to channelopathies.

Authors:  Milagros Marín; Francisco J Esteban; Hilario Ramírez-Rodrigo; Eduardo Ros; María José Sáez-Lara
Journal:  BMC Bioinformatics       Date:  2019-11-12       Impact factor: 3.169

Review 7.  How to Write a Systematic Review: A Narrative Review.

Authors:  Ali Hasanpour Dehkordi; Elaheh Mazaheri; Hanan A Ibrahim; Sahar Dalvand; Reza Ghanei Gheshlagh
Journal:  Int J Prev Med       Date:  2021-03-29

Review 8.  Phase 4 Studies in Heart Failure - What is Done and What is Needed?

Authors:  Pupalan Iyngkaran; Danny Liew; Peter McDonald; Merlin C Thomas; Christopher Reid; Derek Chew; David L Hare
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rev       Date:  2016

Review 9.  Using Mobile Applications to Increase Physical Activity: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Laura Pradal-Cano; Carolina Lozano-Ruiz; José Juan Pereyra-Rodríguez; Francesc Saigí-Rubió; Anna Bach-Faig; Laura Esquius; F Xavier Medina; Alicia Aguilar-Martínez
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2020-11-07       Impact factor: 3.390

10.  Toolkit of methodological resources to conduct systematic reviews.

Authors:  Marta Roqué; Laura Martínez-García; Ivan Solà; Pablo Alonso-Coello; Xavier Bonfill; Javier Zamora
Journal:  F1000Res       Date:  2020-02-04
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.