Literature DB >> 31720912

A 24-step guide on how to design, conduct, and successfully publish a systematic review and meta-analysis in medical research.

Taulant Muka1, Marija Glisic2,3, Jelena Milic4,5, Sanne Verhoog2, Julia Bohlius2, Wichor Bramer6, Rajiv Chowdhury7, Oscar H Franco2.   

Abstract

To inform evidence-based practice in health care, guidelines and policies require accurate identification, collation, and integration of all available evidence in a comprehensive, meaningful, and time-efficient manner. Approaches to evidence synthesis such as carefully conducted systematic reviews and meta-analyses are essential tools to summarize specific topics. Unfortunately, not all systematic reviews are truly systematic, and their quality can vary substantially. Since well-conducted evidence synthesis typically involves a complex set of steps, we believe formulating a cohesive, step-by-step guide on how to conduct a systemic review and meta-analysis is essential. While most of the guidelines on systematic reviews focus on how to report or appraise systematic reviews, they lack guidance on how to synthesize evidence efficiently. To facilitate the design and development of evidence syntheses, we provide a clear and concise, 24-step guide on how to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies and clinical trials. We describe each step, illustrate it with concrete examples, and provide relevant references for further guidance. The 24-step guide (1) simplifies the methodology of conducting a systematic review, (2) provides healthcare professionals and researchers with methodologically sound tools for conducting systematic reviews and meta-analyses, and (3) it can enhance the quality of existing evidence synthesis efforts. This guide will help its readers to better understand the complexity of the process, appraise the quality of published systematic reviews, and better comprehend (and use) evidence from medical literature.

Entities:  

Keywords:  24 Steps; Evidence synthesis; Guideline; Meta-analysis; Systematic review

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31720912     DOI: 10.1007/s10654-019-00576-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Epidemiol        ISSN: 0393-2990            Impact factor:   8.082


  38 in total

Review 1.  Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement. Quality of Reporting of Meta-analyses.

Authors:  D Moher; D J Cook; S Eastwood; I Olkin; D Rennie; D F Stroup
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1999-11-27       Impact factor: 79.321

Review 2.  Comparison of evidence of treatment effects in randomized and nonrandomized studies.

Authors:  J P Ioannidis; A B Haidich; M Pappa; N Pantazis; S I Kokori; M G Tektonidou; D G Contopoulos-Ioannidis; J Lau
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2001-08-15       Impact factor: 56.272

3.  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

4.  How should meta-regression analyses be undertaken and interpreted?

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

Review 5.  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

6.  Demystifying fixed and random effects meta-analysis.

Authors:  Adriani Nikolakopoulou; Dimitris Mavridis; Georgia Salanti
Journal:  Evid Based Ment Health       Date:  2014-04-01

Review 7.  Use of Plant-Based Therapies and Menopausal Symptoms: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Authors:  Oscar H Franco; Rajiv Chowdhury; Jenna Troup; Trudy Voortman; Setor Kunutsor; Maryam Kavousi; Clare Oliver-Williams; Taulant Muka
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2016-06-21       Impact factor: 56.272

8.  ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions.

Authors:  Jonathan Ac Sterne; Miguel A Hernán; Barnaby C Reeves; Jelena Savović; Nancy D Berkman; Meera Viswanathan; David Henry; Douglas G Altman; Mohammed T Ansari; Isabelle Boutron; James R Carpenter; An-Wen Chan; Rachel Churchill; Jonathan J Deeks; Asbjørn Hróbjartsson; Jamie Kirkham; Peter Jüni; Yoon K Loke; Theresa D Pigott; Craig R Ramsay; Deborah Regidor; Hannah R Rothstein; Lakhbir Sandhu; Pasqualina L Santaguida; Holger J Schünemann; Beverly Shea; Ian Shrier; Peter Tugwell; Lucy Turner; Jeffrey C Valentine; Hugh Waddington; Elizabeth Waters; George A Wells; Penny F Whiting; Julian Pt Higgins
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2016-10-12

9.  Reviewing retrieved references for inclusion in systematic reviews using EndNote.

Authors:  Wichor M Bramer; Jelena Milic; Frans Mast
Journal:  J Med Libr Assoc       Date:  2017-01

Review 10.  Living network meta-analysis compared with pairwise meta-analysis in comparative effectiveness research: empirical study.

Authors:  Adriani Nikolakopoulou; Dimitris Mavridis; Toshi A Furukawa; Andrea Cipriani; Andrea C Tricco; Sharon E Straus; George C M Siontis; Matthias Egger; Georgia Salanti
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2018-02-28
View more
  47 in total

1.  Sexual violence and cardiovascular disease risk: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Karen P Jakubowski; Vanessa Murray; Natalie Stokes; Rebecca C Thurston
Journal:  Maturitas       Date:  2021-08-04       Impact factor: 4.342

2.  Racial differences in all-cause mortality and future complications among people with diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis of data from more than 2.4 million individuals.

Authors:  Yasmin Ezzatvar; Robinson Ramírez-Vélez; Mikel Izquierdo; Antonio García-Hermoso
Journal:  Diabetologia       Date:  2021-08-28       Impact factor: 10.122

Review 3.  Neuroplasticity of Acupuncture for Stroke: An Evidence-Based Review of MRI.

Authors:  Jinhuan Zhang; Chunjian Lu; Xiaoxiong Wu; Dehui Nie; Haibo Yu
Journal:  Neural Plast       Date:  2021-08-19       Impact factor: 3.599

Review 4.  Prevalence and novel risk factors for vitamin D insufficiency in elite athletes: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Tilda Harju; Blair Gray; Alexandra Mavroedi; Abdulaziz Farooq; John Joseph Reilly
Journal:  Eur J Nutr       Date:  2022-07-26       Impact factor: 4.865

5.  The Systematic Review Meta-Analysis Conundrum.

Authors:  Shishir Singh
Journal:  J Conserv Dent       Date:  2022-05-02

6.  The Brain in Oral Clefting: A Systematic Review With Meta-Analyses.

Authors:  Kinga A Sándor-Bajusz; Asaad Sadi; Eszter Varga; Györgyi Csábi; Georgios N Antonoglou; Szimonetta Lohner
Journal:  Front Neuroanat       Date:  2022-06-10       Impact factor: 3.543

Review 7.  A systematic review on the role of MSC-derived exosomal miRNAs in the treatment of heart failure.

Authors:  Yesica Abril Botello-Flores; Martha Yocupicio-Monroy; Norma Balderrábano-Saucedo; Alejandra Contreras-Ramos
Journal:  Mol Biol Rep       Date:  2022-04-01       Impact factor: 2.742

8.  Primary esophageal non-Hodgkin's lymphoma: demographics, clinical characteristics, histopathologic types, and survival in 179 patients from the SEER program and systematic review of the literature.

Authors:  Andrea Carolina Quiroga-Centeno; Ileana Rocio Bautista-Parada; Luis F Tapias; Sergio Alejandro Gómez-Ochoa
Journal:  Esophagus       Date:  2021-04-20       Impact factor: 4.230

9.  Letter to the Editor on "Systematic Review of Diets Enriched in Oleic Acid and Obesity".

Authors:  Hamidreza Raeisi-Dehkordi; Mostafa Dianatinasab; Mojgan Amiri
Journal:  Adv Nutr       Date:  2021-03-31       Impact factor: 8.701

Review 10.  A brief introduction of meta-analyses in clinical practice and research.

Authors:  Xiao-Meng Wang; Xi-Ru Zhang; Zhi-Hao Li; Wen-Fang Zhong; Pei Yang; Chen Mao
Journal:  J Gene Med       Date:  2021-03-25       Impact factor: 4.565

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.