HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via CrossRef Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Crowther, M. A. Articles by Cook, D. J. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Crowther, M. A. Articles by Cook, D. J. Social Bookmarking                   What's this?

Trials and Tribulations of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses

Correspondence: Mark A. Crowther, MD, MSC, St. Joseph’s Hospital, 50 Charlton Ave. East, Rm L208, Hamilton, ON L8N 4A6, Canada; phone (905) 521-6024; fax (905) 540-6568; crowthrm{at}mcmaster.ca

Abstract

Systematic reviews can help practitioners keep abreast of the medical literature by summarizing large bodies of evidence and helping to explain differences among studies on the same question. A systematic review involves the application of scientific strategies, in ways that limit bias, to the assembly, critical appraisal, and synthesis of all relevant studies that address a specific clinical question. A meta-analysis is a type of systematic review that uses statistical methods to combine and summarize the results of several primary studies. Because the review process itself (like any other type of research) is subject to bias, a useful review requires rigorous methods that are clearly reported. Used increasingly to inform medical decision making, plan future research agendas, and establish clinical policy, systematic reviews may strengthen the link between best research evidence and optimal health care. In this article, we discuss key steps in how to critically appraise and how to conduct a systematic review or meta-analysis.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?