Literature DB >> 8724213

Understanding research synthesis (meta-analysis).

F Mosteller1, G A Colditz.   

Abstract

Synthesis of research findings has long been a part of reviewing and summarizing a field of study. Public health decisions are made on the available evidence. We summarize the approaches to research synthesis that draw on the best available evidence and the use of quantitative summaries through meta-analysis. We focus on observational studies. Heterogeneity offers the potential to observe a relation across study populations and circumstances. We emphasize the benefits of heterogeneity in overviews and the need to explore and describe the sources of heterogeneity. Random effects approaches to combining data are recommended, and the use of regression approaches is emphasized. Excluding studies with extreme results may bias a research synthesis and underestimate the true variance of the results, thus contributing to misleading inference. Thorough searching is the best guard against publication bias. We conclude with guidelines for combining epidemiological studies.

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8724213     DOI: 10.1146/annurev.pu.17.050196.000245

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Annu Rev Public Health        ISSN: 0163-7525            Impact factor:   21.981


  52 in total

Review 1.  Methods in epidemiology and public health: does practice match theory?

Authors:  D L Weed
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  2001-02       Impact factor: 3.710

Review 2.  Criteria for evaluating evidence on public health interventions.

Authors:  L Rychetnik; M Frommer; P Hawe; A Shiell
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  2002-02       Impact factor: 3.710

3.  Publication bias in clinical trials and economic analyses.

Authors:  N Freemantle; J Mason
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1997-07       Impact factor: 4.981

4.  Hepatic arterial infusion after curative resection of colorectal cancer metastases: a meta-analysis of prospective clinical trials.

Authors:  Thomas E Clancy; Elijah Dixon; Roy Perlis; Francis R Sutherland; Michael J Zinner
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 3.452

5.  An alternative to null-hypothesis significance tests.

Authors:  Peter R Killeen
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2005-05

6.  A comparison of label-based review and ALE meta-analysis in the Stroop task.

Authors:  Angela R Laird; Kathryn M McMillan; Jack L Lancaster; Peter Kochunov; Peter E Turkeltaub; Jose V Pardo; Peter T Fox
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2005-05       Impact factor: 5.038

Review 7.  The clinical significance of adaptation to changing health: a meta-analysis of response shift.

Authors:  Carolyn E Schwartz; Rita Bode; Nicholas Repucci; Janine Becker; Mirjam A G Sprangers; Peter M Fayers
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2006-09-26       Impact factor: 4.147

8.  Non-Bayesian knowledge propagation using model-based analysis of data from multiple clinical studies.

Authors:  Jakob Ribbing; Andrew C Hooker; E Niclas Jonsson
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn       Date:  2007-11-08       Impact factor: 2.745

9.  Required sample size and nonreplicability thresholds for heterogeneous genetic associations.

Authors:  Ramal Moonesinghe; Muin J Khoury; Tiebin Liu; John P A Ioannidis
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2008-01-03       Impact factor: 11.205

Review 10.  A systematic review of the effectiveness of peer-based interventions on health-related behaviors in adults.

Authors:  Allison R Webel; Jennifer Okonsky; Joyce Trompeta; William L Holzemer
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2009-12-17       Impact factor: 9.308

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.