Meta‐analysis in context

Aims and objectives.  To provide a detailed description of the concept, practice and relevance of meta‐analysis. Background.  An increasing abundance of research contributes to a gap between research and clinical practice. The conduct of meta‐analysis, when carried out appropriately, provides a means by which data may be summarised such that it provides important answers for practising clinicians pertaining to the strength and direction of the evidence base. Design.  A discursive design was adopted to encapsulate the current thinking regarding the use of meta‐analysis. Methods.  A literature review approach was employed to provide a narrative summary of the subject of meta‐analysis. Meta‐analysis is a statistical procedure, which involves quantitatively pooling the data from a group of independent studies that have looked at the same or similar clinical problems, using the same or similar research methods. The data are then reanalysed to calculate a pooled estimate of effect and a confidence interval around this estimate. Results.  The findings from this review indicate that meta‐analysis is a statistical procedure, which involves quantitatively pooling the data from a group of independent studies that have looked at the same or similar clinical problems, using the same or similar research methods. Correctly conducted, meta‐analysis provides useful information for practice, identifying the strength and direction of the evidence base pertaining to important clinical problems. Conclusion.  Meta‐analysis is a useful means by which those in the clinical practice setting may clarify the evidence base surrounding a wide variety of clinical problems. Relevance to clinical practice.  The value of meta‐analysis is that this information may be used to guide clinical practice decision‐making and also to direct the development of future research strategies.