Evidence-based decision-making 2: Systematic reviews and meta-analysis.

The number of studies published in the biomedical literature has dramatically increased over the last few decades. This massive proliferation of literature makes clinical medicine increasingly complex, and information from multiple studies is often needed to inform a particular clinical decision. However, available studies often vary in their design, methodological quality, populations studied and may define the research question of interest quite differently, which can make it challenging to synthesize their conclusions. In addition, since even highly cited trials may be challenged over time, clinical decision-making requires ongoing reconciliation of studies which provide different answers to the same question. Because it is often impractical for readers to track down and review all the primary studies, systematic reviews and meta-analyses are an important source of evidence on the diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment of any given disease. This chapter summarizes methods for conducting and reading systematic reviews and meta-analyses, as well as describing potential advantages and disadvantages of these publications.

[1]  S. Yusuf,et al.  Overcoming the limitations of current meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials , 1998, The Lancet.

[2]  G H Guyatt,et al.  Users' guides to the medical literature. VI. How to use an overview. Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. , 1994, JAMA.

[3]  A. Garg,et al.  Basics of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses for the Nephrologist , 2011, Nephron Clinical Practice.

[4]  Gordon H. Guyatt,et al.  Users' guides to the medical literature. VI. How to use an overview. Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. , 1994, JAMA.

[5]  T O Jefferson,et al.  Guidelines for authors and peer reviewers of economic submissions to the BMJ , 1996, BMJ.

[6]  R. Brian Haynes,et al.  Robustness of empirical search strategies for clinical content in MEDLINE , 2002, AMIA.

[7]  P. Easterbrook,et al.  Publication bias in clinical research , 1991, The Lancet.

[8]  M. Tonelli,et al.  Renal replacement therapy in patients with acute renal failure: a systematic review. , 2008, JAMA.

[9]  R. J. Hayes,et al.  Empirical evidence of bias. Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials. , 1995, JAMA.

[10]  M. Tonelli,et al.  Efficacy of statins for primary prevention in people at low cardiovascular risk: a meta-analysis , 2011, Canadian Medical Association Journal.

[11]  R. Riley,et al.  Meta-analysis of individual participant data: rationale, conduct, and reporting , 2010, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[12]  Jonathan C Craig,et al.  Role of blood pressure targets and specific antihypertensive agents used to prevent diabetic nephropathy and delay its progression. , 2006, Journal of the American Society of Nephrology : JASN.

[13]  P. Rochon,et al.  A study of manufacturer-supported trials of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in the treatment of arthritis. , 1994, Archives of internal medicine.

[14]  D. Greenwood,et al.  Dietary fibre intake and risk of cardiovascular disease: systematic review and meta-analysis , 2013, BMJ.

[15]  A R Jadad,et al.  What contributions do languages other than English make on the results of meta-analyses? , 2000, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[16]  G. Guyatt,et al.  Grading strength of recommendations and quality of evidence in clinical guidelines: report from an american college of chest physicians task force. , 2006, Chest.

[17]  J. Berlin,et al.  Invited commentary: benefits of heterogeneity in meta-analysis of data from epidemiologic studies. , 1995, American journal of epidemiology.

[18]  Gordon H Guyatt,et al.  An observational study found that authors of randomized controlled trials frequently use concealment of randomization and blinding, despite the failure to report these methods. , 2004, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[19]  K. Dickersin,et al.  Factors influencing publication of research results. Follow-up of applications submitted to two institutional review boards. , 1992, JAMA.

[20]  Phil Edwards,et al.  Identification of randomized controlled trials in systematic reviews: accuracy and reliability of screening records , 2002, Statistics in medicine.

[21]  N L Wilczynski,et al.  Reasons for the loss of sensitivity and specificity of methodologic MeSH terms and textwords in MEDLINE. , 1995, Proceedings. Symposium on Computer Applications in Medical Care.

[22]  Gordon H. Guyatt,et al.  Users' Guides to the Medical Literature: V. How to Use an Article About Prognosis , 1994 .

[23]  Lisa Hartling,et al.  Systematic review data extraction: cross-sectional study showed that experience did not increase accuracy. , 2010, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[24]  Kristine M. Thompson,et al.  Off-hour presentation and outcomes in patients with acute myocardial infarction: systematic review and meta-analysis , 2014, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[25]  S. Pocock,et al.  The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies , 2007, The Lancet.

[26]  Jesse A Berlin,et al.  Does blinding of readers affect the results of meta-analyses? , 1997, The Lancet.

[27]  A R Jadad,et al.  Methodology and reports of systematic reviews and meta-analyses: a comparison of Cochrane reviews with articles published in paper-based journals. , 1998, JAMA.

[28]  Jonathan A C Sterne,et al.  Systematic reviews in health care: Investigating and dealing with publication and other biases in meta-analysis. , 2001, BMJ.

[29]  Igor Rudan,et al.  Comparison of global estimates of prevalence and risk factors for peripheral artery disease in 2000 and 2010: a systematic review and analysis , 2013, The Lancet.

[30]  Ethan M Balk,et al.  Correlation of quality measures with estimates of treatment effect in meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials. , 2002, JAMA.

[31]  D. Moher,et al.  Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA Statement , 2009, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[32]  L. Schwingshackl,et al.  Dietary fatty acids in the secondary prevention of coronary heart disease: a systematic review, meta-analysis and meta-regression , 2014, BMJ Open.

[33]  Philippe Ravaud,et al.  Reporting of results from network meta-analyses: methodological systematic review , 2014, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[34]  Glyn Elwyn,et al.  Do Interventions Designed to Support Shared Decision-Making Reduce Health Inequalities? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis , 2014, PloS one.

[35]  K. Dickersin,et al.  Systematic Reviews: Identifying relevant studies for systematic reviews , 1994 .

[36]  D. Moher,et al.  The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomized trials. , 2001, Journal of the American Podiatric Medical Association.

[37]  G. Grégoire,et al.  Discrepancies between meta-analyses and subsequent large randomized, controlled trials. , 1997, The New England journal of medicine.

[38]  C Anello,et al.  Exploratory or analytic meta-analysis: should we distinguish between them? , 1995, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[39]  David Moher,et al.  The STARD Statement for Reporting Studies of Diagnostic Accuracy: Explanation and Elaboration , 2003, Annals of Internal Medicine [serial online].

[40]  R. Schrier,et al.  Acute renal failure and sepsis. , 2004, The New England journal of medicine.

[41]  A. Jadad,et al.  Meta-analyses to evaluate analgesic interventions: a systematic qualitative review of their methodology. , 1996, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[42]  Gordon H Guyatt,et al.  Physicians' and patients' choices in evidence based practice , 2002, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[43]  Lisa Hartling,et al.  Single data extraction generated more errors than double data extraction in systematic reviews. , 2006, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[44]  Jonathan J Deeks,et al.  Issues in the selection of a summary statistic for meta‐analysis of clinical trials with binary outcomes , 2002, Statistics in medicine.

[45]  Douglas G Altman,et al.  Systematic reviews in health care: Assessing the quality of controlled clinical trials. , 2001, BMJ.

[46]  R. Davidson Source of funding and outcome of clinical trials , 1986, Journal of general internal medicine.

[47]  N. Laird,et al.  Meta-analysis in clinical trials. , 1986, Controlled clinical trials.

[48]  D. Sambunjak,et al.  Steps in the undertaking of a systematic review in orthopaedic surgery , 2012, International Orthopaedics.

[49]  I. Olkin,et al.  Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement , 1999, The Lancet.

[50]  R. Steinbrook Searching for the right search--reaching the medical literature. , 2006, The New England journal of medicine.

[51]  Gary H Lyman,et al.  The strengths and limitations of meta-analyses based on aggregate data , 2005, BMC Medical Research Methodology.

[52]  C. Clark,et al.  Type 2 diabetes patients educated by other patients perform at least as well as patients trained by professionals , 2013, Diabetes/metabolism research and reviews.

[53]  D. Cook,et al.  The Relation between Systematic Reviews and Practice Guidelines , 1997, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[54]  Christopher H Schmid,et al.  Summing up evidence: one answer is not always enough , 1998, The Lancet.

[55]  S. Lindsay,et al.  Socioeconomic development as an intervention against malaria: a systematic review and meta-analysis , 2013, The Lancet.

[56]  J. Lau,et al.  Reading and critically appraising systematic reviews and meta-analyses: a short primer with a focus on hepatology. , 2005, Journal of hepatology.

[57]  G. Grégoire,et al.  Selecting the language of the publications included in a meta-analysis: is there a Tower of Babel bias? , 1995, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[58]  C. Umscheid A Primer on Performing Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses. , 2013, Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America.

[59]  Leslie A. Walters,et al.  Lost in publication: Half of all renal practice evidence is published in non-renal journals. , 2006, Kidney international.

[60]  B. Jaber,et al.  Effect of biocompatibility of hemodialysis membranes on mortality in acute renal failure: a meta-analysis. , 2002, Clinical nephrology.

[61]  D. Cook,et al.  Assessing the quality of reports of randomised trials: implications for the conduct of meta-analyses. , 1999, Health technology assessment.

[62]  Philip F Halloran,et al.  Immunosuppressive drugs for kidney transplantation. , 2004, The New England journal of medicine.

[63]  C. Counsell,et al.  Formulating Questions and Locating Primary Studies for Inclusion in Systematic Reviews , 1997, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[64]  B. Jaber,et al.  Dialysis Membrane and Modality in Acute Renal Failure: Understanding Discordant Meta‐Analyses , 2003, Seminars in dialysis.

[65]  George Davey Smith,et al.  Meta-analysis: Beyond the grand mean? , 1997, BMJ.

[66]  P. Parfrey,et al.  Preventing Nephropathy Induced by Contrast Medium , 2006 .

[67]  P. A. van den Brandt,et al.  The art of quality assessment of RCTs included in systematic reviews. , 2001, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[68]  A. Garg,et al.  Meta-Analysis: Risk for Hypertension in Living Kidney Donors , 2006, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[69]  J. Ioannidis Contradicted and initially stronger effects in highly cited clinical research. , 2005, JAMA.

[70]  E. Romagnoli,et al.  Compliance with QUOROM and quality of reporting of overlapping meta-analyses on the role of acetylcysteine in the prevention of contrast associated nephropathy: case study , 2006, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[71]  Mark C Simmonds,et al.  Meta-analysis of individual patient data from randomized trials: a review of methods used in practice , 2005, Clinical trials.

[72]  C. Warlow,et al.  Systematic review of evidence on thrombolytic therapy for acute ischaemic stroke , 1997, The Lancet.

[73]  George Davey Smith,et al.  meta-analysis bias in location and selection of studies , 1998 .

[74]  J. Kellum,et al.  Influence of dialysis membranes on outcomes in acute renal failure: a meta-analysis. , 2002, Kidney international.

[75]  M. Rupp,et al.  Treatment of hospital-acquired pneumonia with linezolid or vancomycin: a systematic review and meta-analysis , 2013, BMJ Open.

[76]  S. Yusuf,et al.  Meta-analysis of randomized trials: looking back and looking ahead. , 1997, Controlled clinical trials.

[77]  A. Levey,et al.  Effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors on the progression of nondiabetic renal disease: a meta-analysis of randomized trials. Angiotensin-Converting-Enzyme Inhibition and Progressive Renal Disease Study Group. , 1997, Annals of internal medicine.

[78]  S. Thompson,et al.  Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta‐analysis , 2002, Statistics in medicine.

[79]  D. Redelmeier,et al.  Translation of research evidence from animals to humans. , 2006, JAMA.

[80]  A. Vickers,et al.  Do certain countries produce only positive results? A systematic review of controlled trials. , 1998, Controlled clinical trials.

[81]  M. Delgado-Rodríguez,et al.  Assessment of publication bias in meta-analyses of cardiovascular diseases , 2005, Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health.

[82]  R. Simes,et al.  Confronting publication bias: a cohort design for meta-analysis. , 1987, Statistics in medicine.

[83]  I. Olkin,et al.  Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology - A proposal for reporting , 2000 .

[84]  S G Thompson,et al.  Systematic Review: Why sources of heterogeneity in meta-analysis should be investigated , 1994, BMJ.

[85]  P Tugwell,et al.  Users' guides to the medical literature. V. How to use an article about prognosis. Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. , 1994, JAMA.

[86]  S. Thompson,et al.  Detecting and describing heterogeneity in meta-analysis. , 1998, Statistics in medicine.