Meta-analysis in medical research: potentials and limitations.
dc.contributor.author | Zwahlen, Marcel | |
dc.contributor.author | Renehan, Andrew G | |
dc.contributor.author | Egger, Matthias | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2009-05-12T18:20:45Z | |
dc.date.available | 2009-05-12T18:20:45Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2009-05-12T18:20:45Z | |
dc.identifier.citation | Meta-analysis in medical research: potentials and limitations., 26 (3):320-9 Urol. Oncol. | en |
dc.identifier.issn | 1078-1439 | |
dc.identifier.pmid | 18452828 | |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1016/j.urolonc.2006.12.001 | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10541/67990 | |
dc.description.abstract | Meta-analysis, the statistical combination of results from several studies to produce a single estimate of a treatment effect or size of an association, continues to attract controversy. We illustrate and discuss the promises and limitations of meta-analysis. Meta-analysis of clinical trials can prevent delays in the introduction of effective treatments or lead to the timely identification of adverse effects. However, meta-analyses are liable to numerous biases, both at the level of the individual study and the selection of studies for inclusion in meta-analysis. The biases and confounding factors that threaten the validity of individual studies will also affect meta-analyses of observational studies. We argue that meta-analyses should only be performed within the framework of systematic reviews that have been prepared using methods that minimize bias and address the combinability of studies. | |
dc.language.iso | en | en |
dc.subject | Heterogeity | en |
dc.subject | Medical Research | en |
dc.subject.mesh | Biomedical Research | |
dc.subject.mesh | Controlled Clinical Trials as Topic | |
dc.subject.mesh | Humans | |
dc.subject.mesh | Medical Oncology | |
dc.subject.mesh | Meta-Analysis as Topic | |
dc.subject.mesh | Myocardial Infarction | |
dc.subject.mesh | Review Literature as Topic | |
dc.subject.mesh | Urology | |
dc.title | Meta-analysis in medical research: potentials and limitations. | en |
dc.type | Article | en |
dc.contributor.department | Department of Social and Preventive Medicine, University of Berne, Berne, Switzerland. zwahlen@ispm.unibe.ch | en |
dc.identifier.journal | Urologic Oncology | en |
html.description.abstract | Meta-analysis, the statistical combination of results from several studies to produce a single estimate of a treatment effect or size of an association, continues to attract controversy. We illustrate and discuss the promises and limitations of meta-analysis. Meta-analysis of clinical trials can prevent delays in the introduction of effective treatments or lead to the timely identification of adverse effects. However, meta-analyses are liable to numerous biases, both at the level of the individual study and the selection of studies for inclusion in meta-analysis. The biases and confounding factors that threaten the validity of individual studies will also affect meta-analyses of observational studies. We argue that meta-analyses should only be performed within the framework of systematic reviews that have been prepared using methods that minimize bias and address the combinability of studies. |
Files in this item
This item appears in the following Collection(s)
-
All Christie Publications
-
Surgery
Surgery