A PREVIEW OF ‘META-ANALYSIS’ QUANTITATIVE SYNTHESIS OF THE DIVERSE STATISTICAL RESEARCH RESULTS
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.61841/fq24vy44Keywords:
Evidence Based Medicine, Clinical Trial, Research Reports,, Research Articles,, Statistical Results,, Systematic Review,, Meta-analysisAbstract
The Clinical Trials are being carried out across the world over various geographical areas, on diverse races & ethnics, on various economic groups, with different set of Samples, with Research Methodological differences, laden with different levels of Biases, etc., Often the Researches are repeated by different Researchers at different locations to confirm the previous Research results or to increase their precision & validity. But this Replication of the Researches is often quite difficult due to the above said diverse reasons. Subsequently thus obtained statistical results are also diverse and at times conflicting to each other. In spite of these difficulties integration of findings of different individual studies is much important. The judicious integration of analogous Research results excluding the insignificant deviations has a major role in establishing an ‘Evidence Based Medicine’. Meta-analysis is a technique used to systematically merge the findings of different independent studies, using rigorous statistical methods to calculate an ‘absolute’ effect. This review article is primarily aimed at exploring the rationale of the Scientific Methodology – Meta-analysis.
Downloads
References
1. Haidich, Anna-Bettina. "Meta-analysis in medical research." Hippokratia 14, no. Suppl 1 (2010): 29.
2. Hardy, Rebecca J., and Simon G. Thompson. "Detecting and describing heterogeneity in meta- analysis." Statistics in medicine 17, no. 8 (1998): 841-856.
3. Khan, Khalid, Regina Kunz, Jos Kleijnen, and Gerd Antes. Systematic reviews to support evidence- based medicine. Crc Press, (2011).
4. Uman, Lindsay S. "Systematic reviews and meta-analyses." Journal of the Canadian Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry 20, no. 1 (2011): 57.
5. Yoav Ben-Shlomo, Sara T Brookes, Matthew Hickman. Epidemiology, Evidence-based medicine & Public Health. Wiley-Blackwell, 6th Edition 2013:102-11
6. Venkatesan H., and Sunny Mathew. “Systematic Reviews & Meta-analysis of Published Homoeopathic Clinical Trials Need of the Hour.” Journal of Xi'an University of Architecture & Technology 12, No 4 (2020), 278-281.
7. https://libguides.brown.edu/Reviews/types (Accessed on April 2020)
8. Tina Poklepovic and Sarah Tanveer. “Why Systematic reviews matter - A brief history, overview and practical guide for authors.” Elsevier Connect, Authors update, (July 23 2019). (https://www.elsevier.com/connect/authors-update/why-systematic-reviews-matter) (Accessed on April 2020)
9. Morton, Sally, Alfred Berg, Laura Levit, and Jill Eden, eds. Finding what works in health care: standards for systematic reviews. National Academies Press, (2011).
10. Shorten, Allison, and Brett Shorten. "What is meta-analysis?." Evidence-based nursing 16, no. 1 (2013): 3-4.
11. Cook, Charlene. "Julia H. Littell, Jacqueline Corcoran and Vijayan Pillai, Systematic reviews and meta- analysis, Oxford University Press, New York (2008), p. 202 ISBN: 978-0-19-532654-3." Children and Youth Services Review 31, no. 4 (2009): 495-496.
12. Basu A. 2017. How to conduct meta-analysis: a basic tutorial. PeerJ Preprints 5:e2978v1 https://doi.org/10.7287/peerj.preprints.2978v1
13. Bashir Y, Conlon KC. Step by step guide to do a systematic review and meta-analysis for medical professionals. Ir J Med Sci. (2018); 187(2): 447–452. doi:10.1007/s11845-017-1663-3
14. Masic, Izet, and Katarina Milinovic. "On-line Biomedical dataBases–the Best source for Quick search of the scientific information in the Biomedicine." Acta Informatica Medica 20, no. 2 (2012): 72.
15. Grewal, Anju, Hanish Kataria, and Ira Dhawan. "Literature search for research planning and identification of research problem." Indian journal of anaesthesia 60, no. 9 (2016): 635.
16. https://connect.ebsco.com/s/article/Searching-with-Boolean-perators?language= en_US (Accessed on April 2020)
17. https://pubmedhh.nlm.nih.gov/nlmd/pico/piconew.php (Accessed on April 2020)
18. https://www.cochranelibrary.com/en/advanced-search/pico (Accessed on April 2020)
19. http://supportcontent.elsevier.com/Support%20Hub/Embase/Files%20&%20Attachements/7996- Embase_PICO%20guide_012016.pdf (Accessed on April 2020)
20. Battat, Robert, Gillian Seidman, Nicholas Chadi, Mohammed Y. Chanda, Jessica Nehme, Jennifer Hulme, Annie Li, Nazlie Faridi, and Timothy F. Brewer. "Global health competencies and approaches in medical education: a literature review." BMC Medical Education 10, no. 1 (2010): 94.
21. Khan, Khalid S., Regina Kunz, Jos Kleijnen, and Gerd Antes. "Five steps to conducting a systematic review." Journal of the royal society of medicine 96, no. 3 (2003): 118-121.
22. https://www.strobe-statement.org/index.php?id=strobe-home (Accessed on April 2020)
23. http://www.consort-statement.org/consort-2010 (Accessed on April 2020)
24. O’Brien, Bridget C., I. B. Harris, T. J. Beckman, D. A. Reed, and D. A. Cook. "Standards for reporting qualitative research." A synthesis of recommendations 2014: 89.
25. Gagnier, Joel J., Gunver Kienle, Douglas G. Altman, David Moher, Harold Sox, David Riley, and CARE Group. "The CARE guidelines: consensus-based clinical case reporting guideline development." Journal of medical case reports 7, no. 1 (2013): 223.
26. Moher, David, Larissa Shamseer, Mike Clarke, Davina Ghersi, Alessandro Liberati, Mark Petticrew, Paul Shekelle, and Lesley A. Stewart. "Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta- analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement." Systematic reviews 4, no. 1 (2015): 1.
27. Stroup, D. F. "Berlin JA Morton SC Olkin I Williamson GD Rennie D Moher D Becker BJ Sipe TA Thacker SB. Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: a proposal for reporting. Meta- analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) group." Journal of the American Medical Association 283 (2000): 2008-2012.
28. Elamin MB, Flynn DN, Bassler D, et al. Choice of data extraction tools for systematic reviews depends on resources and review complexity. J Clin Epidemiol. (2009);62(5):506–510. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2008.10.016
29. Pedder, Hugo, Grammati Sarri, Edna Keeney, Vanessa Nunes, and Sofia Dias. "Data extraction for complex meta-analysis (DECiMAL) guide." Systematic reviews 5, no. 1 (2016): 212.
30. Rücker, Gerta, Guido Schwarzer, James R. Carpenter, and Martin Schumacher. "Undue reliance on I 2 in assessing heterogeneity may mislead." BMC medical research methodology 8, no. 1 (2008): 79.
31. https://bookdown.org/MathiasHarrer/Doing_Meta_Analysis_in_R/heterogeneity.html#ref- rucker2008undue (Accessed on April 2020)
32. Hunter, John E., and Frank L. Schmidt. "Fixed effects vs. random effects meta-analysis models: Implications for cumulative research knowledge." International Journal of Selection and Assessment 8, no. 4 (2000): 275-292.
33. https://training.cochrane.org/resource/introduction-revman (Accessed on April 2020)
34. Kelley, Ken, and Kristopher J. Preacher. "On effect size." Psychological methods 17, no. 2 (2012): 137.
35. Rosenthal, Robert, Harris Cooper, and L. Hedges. "Parametric measures of effect size." The handbook of research synthesis 621, no. 2 (1994): 231-244.
36. Nancy J. Lee. Critical appraisal: Systematic Reviews and Clinical Practice Guidelines for Drug Therapy, Jan (2009). (Accessed on April 2020)
37. Bigby, Michael. "Understanding and evaluating systematic reviews and meta-analyses." Indian journal of dermatology 59, no. 2 (2014): 134.
38. Perera, Rafael, and Carl Heneghan. "Interpreting meta-analysis in systematic reviews." BMJ Evidence- Based Medicine 13, no. 3 (2008): 67-69.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
You are free to:
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format for any purpose, even commercially.
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
- The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms:
- Attribution — You must give appropriate credit , provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made . You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
Notices:
You do not have to comply with the license for elements of the material in the public domain or where your use is permitted by an applicable exception or limitation .
No warranties are given. The license may not give you all of the permissions necessary for your intended use. For example, other rights such as publicity, privacy, or moral rights may limit how you use the material.
