Systematic reviews and meta-analyses in coloproctology: interpretation and potential pitfalls.
Affiliation
Department of Surgery K, Bispebjerg Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark. pwj01@bbh.regionh.dkIssue Date
2008-01
Metadata
Show full item recordAbstract
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.Citation
Systematic reviews and meta-analyses in coloproctology: interpretation and potential pitfalls. 2008, 10 (1):21-32 Colorectal DisJournal
Colorectal DiseaseDOI
10.1111/j.1463-1318.2007.01421.xPubMed ID
18005187Type
ArticleLanguage
enISSN
1463-1318ae974a485f413a2113503eed53cd6c53
10.1111/j.1463-1318.2007.01421.x