Using Metaanalysis to Evaluate Evidence: Practical Tips and Traps
Author(s) -
Raymond W. Lam,
Sidney H. Kennedy
Publication year - 2005
Publication title -
the canadian journal of psychiatry
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.68
H-Index - 117
eISSN - 1497-0015
pISSN - 0706-7437
DOI - 10.1177/070674370505000306
Subject(s) - randomized controlled trial , meta analysis , medline , systematic review , evidence based medicine , psychology , alternative medicine , publication bias , quality of evidence , medicine , applied psychology , surgery , pathology , political science , law
Although practising evidence-based medicine is the goal of most physicians, it can be a real challenge to sift through the vast body of data to determine the best strategies. Most clinical guidelines regard replicated randomized controlled trials (RCTs), metaanalyses, and systematic reviews as the highest level of evidence to support treatment recommendations. High-quality metaanalyses can overcome many of the drawbacks of individual RCTs and qualitative reviews. They can reduce bias, provide adequate power to demonstrate real differences in outcomes, and resolve the results of inconsistent studies. This paper focuses on basic principles and terms used in metaanalysis, so that clinicians can appropriately evaluate and use their results to guide treatment decisions.
Accelerating Research
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom
Address
John Eccles HouseRobert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom