Systematic reviews and meta-analyses in coloproctology: interpretation and potential pitfalls.

2.50
Hdl Handle:
http://hdl.handle.net/10541/58690
Title:
Systematic reviews and meta-analyses in coloproctology: interpretation and potential pitfalls.
Authors:
Wille-Jørgensen, P; Renehan, Andrew G
Abstract:
A systematic review (SR) is the unbiased appraisal of systematically identified relevant studies. Implicit in its definition is a robust and scientifically valid process, and when performed as such, SR is an important clinical research tool and influence in health policy decision-making. This educational paper outlines that, from the original prototype based on randomized trials, there are now many other types of SRs including those based on: nonrandomized comparative studies, observational studies, prognostic studies, and studies of diagnostic and screening tools. While each of these has a similar 'anatomy' or format, at an individual class level, there are principles specific to each SR type. Several examples from the coloproctology literature are used as case-studies to illustrate potential pitfalls, and upon re-analysis, often reverse or attenuate the conclusions stated in the original publication. These examples serve to emphasize the need for health professionals to understand the process of SR and meta-analysis so that we all arrive at appropriate interpretations to the benefit of our patients.
Affiliation:
Department of Surgery K, Bispebjerg Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark. pwj01@bbh.regionh.dk
Citation:
Systematic reviews and meta-analyses in coloproctology: interpretation and potential pitfalls. 2008, 10 (1):21-32 Colorectal Dis
Journal:
Colorectal Disease
Issue Date:
Jan-2008
URI:
http://hdl.handle.net/10541/58690
DOI:
10.1111/j.1463-1318.2007.01421.x
PubMed ID:
18005187
Type:
Article
Language:
en
ISSN:
1463-1318
Appears in Collections:
All Christie Publications ; Surgery

Full metadata record

DC FieldValue Language
dc.contributor.authorWille-Jørgensen, P-
dc.contributor.authorRenehan, Andrew G-
dc.date.accessioned2009-04-01T23:15:36Z-
dc.date.available2009-04-01T23:15:36Z-
dc.date.issued2008-01-
dc.identifier.citationSystematic reviews and meta-analyses in coloproctology: interpretation and potential pitfalls. 2008, 10 (1):21-32 Colorectal Disen
dc.identifier.issn1463-1318-
dc.identifier.pmid18005187-
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/j.1463-1318.2007.01421.x-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10541/58690-
dc.description.abstractA systematic review (SR) is the unbiased appraisal of systematically identified relevant studies. Implicit in its definition is a robust and scientifically valid process, and when performed as such, SR is an important clinical research tool and influence in health policy decision-making. This educational paper outlines that, from the original prototype based on randomized trials, there are now many other types of SRs including those based on: nonrandomized comparative studies, observational studies, prognostic studies, and studies of diagnostic and screening tools. While each of these has a similar 'anatomy' or format, at an individual class level, there are principles specific to each SR type. Several examples from the coloproctology literature are used as case-studies to illustrate potential pitfalls, and upon re-analysis, often reverse or attenuate the conclusions stated in the original publication. These examples serve to emphasize the need for health professionals to understand the process of SR and meta-analysis so that we all arrive at appropriate interpretations to the benefit of our patients.en
dc.language.isoenen
dc.subjectColorectal Diseaseen
dc.subjectHeterogeneityen
dc.subjectColorectal Canceren
dc.subject.meshColectomy-
dc.subject.meshColorectal Neoplasms-
dc.subject.meshColorectal Surgery-
dc.subject.meshControlled Clinical Trials as Topic-
dc.subject.meshEpidemiologic Studies-
dc.subject.meshFemale-
dc.subject.meshGreat Britain-
dc.subject.meshHumans-
dc.subject.meshMale-
dc.subject.meshMeta-Analysis as Topic-
dc.subject.meshProctocolectomy, Restorative-
dc.subject.meshRandomized Controlled Trials as Topic-
dc.subject.meshReview Literature as Topic-
dc.subject.meshRisk Assessment-
dc.subject.meshSensitivity and Specificity-
dc.subject.meshSurvival Analysis-
dc.subject.meshTreatment Outcome-
dc.titleSystematic reviews and meta-analyses in coloproctology: interpretation and potential pitfalls.en
dc.typeArticleen
dc.contributor.departmentDepartment of Surgery K, Bispebjerg Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark. pwj01@bbh.regionh.dken
dc.identifier.journalColorectal Diseaseen
All Items in Christie are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.