A practical guide to understanding systematic reviews and meta-analyses

A systematic review is a transparent and unbiased review of available information. The published systematic review must report the details of the conduct of the review as one might report the details of a primary research project. A meta-analysis is a powerful and rigorous statistical approach to synthesize data from multiple studies, preferably obtained from a systematic review, in order to enlarge the sample size from smaller studies to test the original hypothesis and/or to generate new ones. The objective of this article is to serve as an easy to read practical guide to understand systematic reviews and meta-analyses for those reading them and for those who might plan to prepare them.

[1]  L. Hedges,et al.  Introduction to Meta‐Analysis , 2009, International Coaching Psychology Review.

[2]  R. Rosenfeld,et al.  Evidence-Based Otitis Media , 2003 .

[3]  Patricia Langenberg,et al.  Meta-Analysis, Decision Analysis, and Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Methods for Quantitative Synthesis in Medicine, 2nd Edition , 2000 .

[4]  Michele Tarsilla.  Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions , 2010, Journal of MultiDisciplinary Evaluation.

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

[6]  Alvan R. Feinstein,et al.  Principles of Medical Statistics , 2001 .

[7]  Steff Lewis,et al.  Forest plots: trying to see the wood and the trees , 2001, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[8]  S. Satya‐Murti.  Evidence-based Medicine: How to Practice and Teach EBM , 1997 .

[9]  Feng Li,et al.  An Introduction to Metaanalysis , 2005 .

[10]  Jacob Cohen.  Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences , 1969, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Research Design.

[11]  R. Rosenfeld,et al.  Natural history of untreated otitis media , 2003, The Laryngoscope.

[12]  P. Lachenbruch.  Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (2nd ed.) , 1989 .

[13]  A R Jadad,et al.  Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary? , 1996, Controlled clinical trials.

[14]  P. Bossuyt,et al.  Development and validation of methods for assessing the quality of diagnostic accuracy studies. , 2004, Health technology assessment.

[15]  J. Dort,et al.  Evaluation of meta-analyses in the otolaryngological literature , 2008, Otolaryngology--head and neck surgery : official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery.

[16]  Diana B. Petitti,et al.  Meta-Analysis, Decision Analysis, and Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Methods for Quantitative Synthesis in Medicine , 1994 .