Role of Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis in Evidence-based Medicine

被引：0
作者：
Stefan Sauerland
Christoph M. Seiler
机构：
[1] University of Cologne,Biochemical and Experimental Division, Medical Faculty
[2] University of Heidelberg,Clinical Study Center of the German Surgical society (SDGC), Department of Surgery
[3] Im Neuenheimer Feld 110,undefined
[4] D-69120,undefined
来源：
World Journal of Surgery | 2005年 / 29卷
关键词：
Systematic Review; Trial Result; Narrative Review; Open Appendectomy; Surgical Trial;
D O I：
暂无
中图分类号：
学科分类号：
摘要：
The overwhelming increase in the quantity of clinical evidence has led to detachment of the evidence and practice because new evidence can be integrated into clinical practice only after it has been critically appraised and synthesized on the basis of the existing evidence. Because many clinicians lack the skills and the time for such information processing, systematic reviews and meta-analyses, their quantitative counterparts, play an important role in health care. Well performed systematic reviews provide clinically relevant information for surgeons, abrogating the need to identify, read, and evaluate many individual studies. This article reviews the basic principles of meta-analysis, discusses its potential weaknesses such as heterogeneity and publication bias, and highlights special situations when dealing with surgical trials.
引用
收藏
页码：582 / 587
页数：5
相关论文
共 82 条
  • [11] Büchler MW.(2000)Does the inclusion of grey literature influence estimates of intervention effectiveness reported in meta-analyses? Lancet 356 1228-1231
  • [12] Barnes DE(1997)Language bias in randomised controlled trials published in English and German Lancet 350 326-329
  • [13] Bero LA.(1999)Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement Lancet 354 1896-1900
  • [14] Antman EM(2001)Assessing the quality of controlled clinical trials B.M.J. 323 42-46
  • [15] Lau J(1999)The hazards of scoring the quality of clinical trials for meta-analysis J.A.M.A. 282 1054-1060
  • [16] Kupelnick B(2002)Issues in the selection of a summary statistic for meta-analysis of clinical trials with binary outcomes Stat. Med. 21 1575-1600
  • [17] L’Abbe KA(2003)Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses B.M.J. 327 557-560
  • [18] Detsky AS(1994)Why sources of heterogeneity in meta-analysis should be investigated B.M.J. 309 1351-1355
  • [19] O’Rourke K.(2002)Investigating causes of heterogeneity in systematic reviews Stat. Med. 21 1503-1511
  • [20] Sauerland S(1998)Does quality of reports of randomised trials affect estimates of intervention efficacy reported in meta-analyses? Lancet 352 609-613
123456789