Meta-Analysis in Medical Research Review Articles:

Meta-analysis is a quantitative approach for systematically combining the results of previous researches in order to arrive at useful conclusions from a body of research. Meta-analyses offer a systematic and quantitative approach to synthesising evidence to answer important therapeutic questions. Nevertheless, pitfalls abound in the execution of meta-analyses and they are fundamentally limited by the quality of the underlying studies. For healthcare managers and clinicians, careful reviewing of published meta-analyses and a balanced assessment of their deficiencies is likely to become an increasingly important in resolving therapeutic uncertainty. It is most useful in summarizing prior research findings when individual studies are too small to yield a valid conclusion. Meta-analysis is most often applied to combine the results of Randomised Control trials (RCTs). For non-experimental studies, this method is powerful when there are many studies with low statistical power. Meta-analyses are now a hallmark of evidence-based medicine.

[1]  T C Chalmers,et al.  The importance of beta, the type II error and sample size in the design and interpretation of the randomized control trial. Survey of 71 "negative" trials. , 1978, The New England journal of medicine.

[2]  T. Chalmers,et al.  Meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials. , 1987, The New England journal of medicine.

[3]  M. L. Smith,et al.  Meta-analysis of psychotherapy outcome studies. , 1977, The American psychologist.

[4]  K. Dickersin.  How important is publication bias? A synthesis of available data. , 1997, AIDS education and prevention : official publication of the International Society for AIDS Education.

[5]  K A L'Abbé,et al.  Meta-analysis in clinical research. , 1987, Annals of internal medicine.

[6]  J. Fleiss,et al.  Meta-analysis in epidemiology, with special reference to studies of the association between exposure to environmental tobacco smoke and lung cancer: a critique. , 1991, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[7]  Richard F. Beltramini,et al.  Meta-Analysis: Quantitative Methods for Research Synthesis , 1987 .

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

[9]  C. Lengeler,et al.  Language bias in randomised controlled trials published in English and German , 1997, The Lancet.

[10]  P. Gøtzsche.  Reference bias in reports of drug trials. , 1987, British medical journal.

[11]  S B Thacker,et al.  Meta-analysis. A quantitative approach to research integration. , 1988, JAMA.

[12]  P. Gøtzsche,et al.  Multiple publication of reports of drug trials , 2004, European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology.

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

[14]  C. Begg,et al.  Publication bias and dissemination of clinical research. , 1989, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

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

[16]  J R Teagarden,et al.  Meta‐Analysis: Whither Narrative Review? , 1989, Pharmacotherapy.

[17]  C. Mulrow.  The medical review article: state of the science. , 1987, Annals of internal medicine.

[18]  U. Ravnskov,et al.  Cholesterol lowering trials in coronary heart disease: frequency of citation and outcome. , 1992, BMJ.

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

[20]  A E Ades,et al.  The Interpretation of Random-Effects Meta-Analysis in Decision Models , 2005, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[21]  G. Glass,et al.  Meta-analysis in social research , 1981 .

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