Metaanalyses are observational studies: How lack of randomization impacts analysis

American Journal of Gastroenterology

Volumn 100, Issue 6, 2005, Pages 1233-1236

  Kaizar, Eloise E ^a  

^a CARNEGIE MELLON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DATA ANALYSIS; EPIDEMIOLOGICAL DATA; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; HUMAN; META ANALYSIS; OBSERVATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUBLISHING; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; REVIEW; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW;

HUMANS; META-ANALYSIS; OBSERVATION; PUBLICATION BIAS; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS;

EID: 21344450739     PISSN: 00029270     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2005.50107.x     Document Type: Review

References (15)

1. Cremonini F, Wise J, Moayyedi P, et al. Diagnostic and therapeutic use of proton pump inhibitors in non-cardiac chest pain: A metaanalysis. Am J Gastroenterol 2005;100:1226-32.
2. Cooper H, Hedges LV, eds. The handbook of research synthesis. Russell Sage Foundation, 1994.
3. Light RJ, Pillemer DB. Summing Up: The Science of Reviewing Research. Harvard University Press, 1984.
4. Connor JT. The value of a p-valueless paper. Am J Gastroenterol 2004;99:1638-40.
5. Macaskill P, Walter SD, Irwig L. A comparison of methods to detect publication bias in meta-analysis. Stat Med 2001;20:641-54.
6. Begg CB, Mazumdar M. Operating characteristics of a rank correlation test for publication bias. Biometrics 1994;50:1088-1101.
7. Section 5: Locating and selecting studies. In: Alderson P, Green S, Higgins JPT, eds. Cochrane reviewers handbook 4.2.2 [updated March 2004], Issue 1. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., 2004.
8. Begg CB. Publication bias. In: Cooper H, Hedges LV, eds. The handbook of research synthesis. Russel Sage Foundation, 1994.
9. Duval S, Tweedie R. Trim and fill: A simple funnel-plot-based method of testing and adjusting for publication bias in meta-analysis. Biometrics 2000;56:455-63.
10. Julian P. TH, Simon G. Thompson. Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. Stat Med 2002;21:1539-58.
11. Thompson SG, Sharp SJ. Explaining heterogeneity in meta-analysis: A comparison of methods. Stat Med 1999;18:2693-2708.
12. Knapp G, Hartung J. Improved tests for a random effects meta-regression with a single covariate. Stat Med 2003;22:2693-2710.
13. Knottnerus JA. The effects of disease verification and referral on the relationship between symptoms and diseases. Med Decis Making 1987;7:139-48.
14. Lachin JM. Biostatistical methods: The assessment of relative risks. John Wiley and Sons, 2000.
15. Moher D, Schulz KF, Altman DG for the CONSORT Group. The CONSORT statement: Revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomized trials. Lancet 2001;357:1191-94.