The role of systematic reviews and meta-analysis in dermatology

Journal of Investigative Dermatology

Volumn 132, Issue 11, 2012, Pages 1-5

  Abuabara, Katrina ^a   Freeman, Esther E ^b   Dellavalle, Robert ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

^b MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL   (United States)

^c VETERANS AFFAIRS MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DERMATOLOGY; EMBASE; HUMAN; MEDLINE; META ANALYSIS (TOPIC); PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; RISK REDUCTION; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; STUDY DESIGN; SYSTEMATIC ERROR; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW (TOPIC);

EID: 84867809503     PISSN: 0022202X     EISSN: 15231747     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/jid.2012.392     Document Type: Review

References (14)

1. Bax L, Yu LM, Ikeda N, Moons KG (2007) A systematic comparison of software dedicated to meta-analysis of causal studies. BMC Med Res Methodol 7:40
2. Deeks JJ (2002) Issues in the selection of a summary statistic for meta-analysis of clinical trials with binary outcomes. Stat Med 21:1575-600 (Pubitemid 34746064)
3. Ebell MH, Siwek J, Weiss BD, Woolf SH, Susman JL, Ewigman B et al. (2004) Simplifying the language of evidence to improve patient care: strength of recommendation taxonomy (SORT): a patient-centered approach to grading evidence in medical literature. J Fam Pract 53:111-20 (Pubitemid 38176583)
4. Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Kunz R, Vist GE, Falck-Ytter Y, Schunemann HJ (2008) What is "quality of evidence" and why is it important to clinicians? BMJ 336:995-8 (Pubitemid 351656090)
5. Hadley G, Derry S, Moore RA (2006) Imiquimod for actinic keratosis: systematic review and meta-analysis. J Invest Dermatol 126:1251-5 (Pubitemid 43997904)
6. Higgins JPT, Green S (eds) (2011) Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Version 5.1.0 (updated March 2011). The Cochrane Collaboration. Available from http://www.cochrane-handbook.org
7. Lewis S, Clarke M (2001) Forest plots: trying to see the wood and the trees. BMJ 322:1479-80 (Pubitemid 32575420)
8. Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, Mulrow C, Gotzsche PC, Ioannidis JP et al. (2009) The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and metaanalyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. PLoS Med 6:e1000100
9. Moher D, Cook DJ, Eastwood S, Olkin I, Rennie D, Stroup DF (1999) Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement. Quality of Reporting of Metaanalyses. Lancet 354:1896-900
10. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG (2009) Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med 6:e1000097
11. Nankervis H, Baibergenova A, Williams HC, Thomas KS (2012) Prospective registration and outcome-reporting bias in randomized controlled trials of eczema treatments: a systematic review. J Invest Dermatol, e-pub ahead of print 26 July 2012
12. Rios LP, Ye C, Thabane L (2010) Association between framing of the research question using the PICOT format and reporting quality of randomized controlled trials. BMC Med Res Methodol 10:11
13. Thabane L, Thomas T, Ye C, Paul J (2009) Posing the research question: not so simple. Can J Anaesth 56:71-9
14. Williams HC, Dellavalle RP (2012) The growth of clinical trials and systematic reviews in informing dermatological patient care. J Invest Dermatol 132:1008-17.