Systematic reviews of meta-analyses: Applications and limitations

Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health

Volumn 60, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 90-92

  Delgado Rodríguez, Miguel ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF JAÉN   (Spain)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EPIDEMIOLOGY; META-ANALYSIS;

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN; HUMAN; MEDICAL LITERATURE; META ANALYSIS; OBSERVATIONAL METHOD; PUBLICATION; PUBLISHING; QUALITATIVE VALIDITY; QUALITY CONTROL; REVIEW; RISK; SIMULATION; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW;

EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; META-ANALYSIS; PUBLICATION BIAS; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS; REVIEW LITERATURE; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

EID: 31144474900     PISSN: 0143005X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/jech.2005.035253     Document Type: Review

References (34)

1. Spitzer WO. Meta-meta-analysis: unanswered questions about aggregating data. J Clin Epidemiol 1991;44:103-7.
2. Katerndahl DA, Lawler WR. Variability in meta-analytic results concerning the value of cholesterol reduction in coronary heart disease: a meta-meta-analysis. Am J Epidemiol 1999;149:429-41.
3. Grissom RJ. The magical number .7 +/- .2: meta-meta-analysis of the probability of superior outcome in comparisons involving therapy, placebo, and control. J Consult Clin Psychol 1996;64:973-82.
4. Villar J, Carroli G, Belizán JM. Predictive ability of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials. Lancet 1995;345:772-6.
5. Jadad AR, Cook DR, Jones A, et al. Methodology and reports of systematic reviews and meta-analyses. A comparison of Cochrane reviews with articles published in paper-based journals. JAMA 1998;280:278-80.
6. Palma S, Delgado-Rodríguez M. Assessment of publication bias in meta-analyses of cardiovascular diseases. J Epidemiol Community Health 2005;59:864-9.
7. Petitti DB. Approaches to heterogeneity in meta-analysis. Stat Med 2001;20:3625-33.
8. Egger M, Davey Smith G, Schneider M, et al. Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. BMJ 1997;315:629-34.
9. Sterne JAC, Gavaghan D, Egger M. Publication and related bias in meta-analysis: power of statistical tests and prevalence in the literature. J Clin Epidemiol 2000;53:1119-29.
10. Macaskill P, Walter SD, Irwig L. A comparison of methods to detect publication bias in meta-analysis. Stat Med 2001;20:641-54.
11. Jennions M, Moller A. Publication bias in ecology and evolution: an empirical assessment using the trim and fill method. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc 2002;77:211-22.
12. Pham B, Platt R, McAuley L, et al. Is there a "best" way to detect and minimize publication bias? An empirical evaluation. Eval Health Professions 2001;24:109-25.
13. Song F, Khan KS, Dinnes J, et al. Asymmetric funnel plots and publication bias in meta-analyses of diagnostic accuracy. Int J Epidemiol 2002;31:88-95.
14. Sutton AJ, Duval SJ, Tweedie RL, et al. Empirical assessment of effect of publication bias on meta-analyses. BMJ 2000;320:1574-7.
15. Easterbrook PJ, Berlin JA, Gopalan R, et al. Publication bias in clinical research. Lancet 1991;337:867-72.
16. Dickersin K, Min YL, Meinert CL. Factors influencing publication of research results. Follow-up of applications submitted to two institutional review boards. JAMA 1992;267:374-8.
17. Lexchin J, Bero LA, Djulbegovic B, et al. Pharmaceutical industry sponsorship and research outcome and quality: systematic review. BMJ 2003;326:1167-70.
18. Bekelman JE, Li Y, Gross CP. Scope and impact of financial conflicts of interest in biomedical research: a systematic review. JAMA 2003;289:454-65.
19. Decullier E, Lhéritier V, Chapuis F. Fate of biomedical research protocols and cohort publication bias in France: retrospective study. BMJ 2005;331:19-24.
20. Egger M, Schneider M, Smith GD. Meta-analysis Spurious precision? Meta-analysis of observational studies. BMJ 1998;316:140-4.
21. Sterne JAC, Egger M, Davey Smith G. Systematic reviews in health care: Investigating and dealing with publication and other biases in meta-analysis. BMJ 2001;323:101-5.
22. Graves P, Gelband H. Vaccines for preventing malaria. Cochrane Library. Issue 1. Oxford: Update Software, 2003.
23. Leimu T, Koricheva J. Cumulative meta-analysis: a new tool for detection of temporal trends and publication bias in ecology. Proc R Soc Lond B 2004;271:1961-6.
24. Berlin JA, Laird NM, Sacks HS, et al. A comparison of statistical methods for combining event rates from clinical trials. Stat Med 1989;8:141-51.
25. Greenland S, Salvan A. Bias in the one-step method for pooling study results. Stat Med 1990;9:247-52.
26. Villar J, Mackey ME, Carroli G, et al. Meta-analyses in systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials in perinatal medicine: comparison of fixed and random effects models. Stat Med 2001;20:3635-47.
27. Engels EA, Schmid CH, Terrin N, et al. Heterogeneity and statistical significance in meta-analysis: an empirical study or 125 meta-analyses. Stat Med 2000;19:1707-28.
28. Colditz GA, Burdick E, Mosteller F. Heterogeneity in meta-analysis of data of epidemiologic studies: a commentary. Am J Epidemiol 1995;142:371-81.
29. Schulz KF, Chalmers I, Hayes RJ, et al. Empirical evidence of bias. Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials. JAMA 1995;273:408-12.
30. Schmid CH, Lau J, McIntosh MW, et al. An empirical study of the control rate as a predictor of treatment efficacy in meta-analysis of clinical trials. Stat Med 1998;17:1923-42.
31. Moher D, Pham B, Jones A, et al. Does quality of reports of randomised trials affect estimates of intervention efficacy reported in meta-analyses? Lancet 1998;352:609-13.
32. Glasziou PP, Sanders SL. Investigating causes of heterogeneity in systematic reviews. Stat Med 2002;21:1503-11.
33. Lijmer JG, Bossuyt PMM, Heisterkamp SH. Exploring sources of heterogeneity in systematic reviews of diagnostic tests. Stat Med 2002;21:1525-37.
34. Higgins JPT, Thompson SG. Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. Stat Med 2002;21:1539-58.