Meta-analysis as a tool to obtain new evidence

被引:0
作者
Koch, A [1 ]
Ziegler, S [1 ]
机构
[1] Bundesinst Arzneimittel & Med Prod BfArM, D-13353 Berlin, Germany
关键词
meta-analysis; quality; publication bias; heterogeneity; fixed effects model; sensitivity analysis;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
In these days, more than one clinical trial is mostly performed to evaluate a new treatment or therapeutic intervention. This necessitates a combined evaluation of their results. An integration of evidence from several trials is also helpful to determine the actual knowledge. These are the main goals of meta-analyses. Since the end of the 80s meta-analyses are widely used in clinical research. At the beginning of a meta-analysis, a protocol has to be developed. Similar to a protocol of a clinical trial, the inclusion and exclusion criteria for trials, the hypotheses and the planned analyses have to be fixed. After a careful localization of trials, a combined statistical analysis is performed. An investigation of heterogeneity, i.e., differences between study results, is indispensable. During the last years, the tool meta-analysis has been criticized. The criticism mainly results from poorly conducted meta-analyses which generated results without prespecifying hypotheses or which merely combined study results. Well-planned meta-analyses, on the contrary, have an increasing influence in clinical research.
引用
收藏
页码:83 / 90
页数:8
相关论文
共 17 条
[1]  
ANTES G, 1996, DEUT MED WOCHENSCHR, V138, P829
[2]   META-ANALYSIS OF CLINICAL-TRIALS - SUMMARY OF AN INTERNATIONAL-CONFERENCE [J].
BOISSEL, JP ;
SACKS, HS ;
LEIZOROVICZ, A ;
BLANCHARD, J ;
PANAK, E ;
PEYRIEUX, JC .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY, 1988, 34 (06) :535-538
[3]   A METHOD FOR ASSESSING THE QUALITY OF A RANDOMIZED CONTROL TRIAL [J].
CHALMERS, TC ;
SMITH, H ;
BLACKBURN, B ;
SILVERMAN, B ;
SCHROEDER, B ;
REITMAN, D ;
AMBROZ, A .
CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIALS, 1981, 2 (01) :31-49
[4]   REPORTING ON METHODS IN CLINICAL-TRIALS [J].
DERSIMONIAN, R ;
CHARETTE, LJ ;
MCPEEK, B ;
MOSTELLER, F .
NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 1982, 306 (22) :1332-1337
[5]   SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS - IDENTIFYING RELEVANT STUDIES FOR SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS [J].
DICKERSIN, K ;
SCHERER, R ;
LEFEBVRE, C .
BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 1994, 309 (6964) :1286-1291
[6]   MISLEADING METAANALYSIS [J].
EGGER, M ;
SMITH, GD .
BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 1995, 310 (6982) :752-754
[7]   METAANALYSIS - STATISTICAL ALCHEMY FOR THE 21ST-CENTURY [J].
FEINSTEIN, AR .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 1995, 48 (01) :71-79
[8]   Rating the quality of evidence for clinical practice guidelines [J].
Hadorn, DC ;
Baker, D ;
Hodges, JS ;
Hicks, N .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 1996, 49 (07) :749-754
[9]   A MONTE-CARLO INVESTIGATION OF HOMOGENEITY TESTS OF THE ODDS RATIO UNDER VARIOUS SAMPLE-SIZE CONFIGURATIONS [J].
JONES, MP ;
OGORMAN, TW ;
LEMKE, JH ;
WOOLSON, RF .
BIOMETRICS, 1989, 45 (01) :171-181
[10]   LOW-MOLECULAR-WEIGHT VERSUS STANDARD HEPARIN FOR PREVENTION OF VENOUS THROMBOEMBOLISM AFTER MAJOR ABDOMINAL-SURGERY [J].
KAKKAR, VV ;
COHEN, AT ;
EDMONSON, RA ;
PHILLIPS, MJ ;
COOPER, DJ ;
DAS, SK ;
MAHER, KT ;
SANDERSON, RM ;
WARD, VP ;
KAKKAR, S .
LANCET, 1993, 341 (8840) :259-265