How to read a systematic review and meta-analysis and apply the results to patient care: Users' guides to the medical literature

JAMA

Volumn 312, Issue 2, 2014, Pages 171-179

  Murad, Mohammad Hassan ^a   Montori, Victor M ^a   Ioannidis, John P A ^b,c   Jaeschke, Roman ^d   Devereaux, P J ^d   Prasad, Kameshwar ^e   Neumann, Ignacio ^f   Carrasco Labra, Alonso ^d,g   Agoritsas, Thomas ^d   Hatala, Rose ^h   Meade, Maureen O ^d   Wyer, Peter ⁱ   Cook, Deborah J ^d   Guyatt, Gordon ^d  

^a MAYO CLINIC   (United States)

^b STANFORD UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^c STANFORD LAW SCHOOL   (United States)

^d MCMASTER UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^e ALL INDIA INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES   (India)

^f PONTIFICIA UNIVERSIDAD CATÓLICA DE CHILE   (Chile)

^g UNIVERSITY OF CHILE   (Chile)

^h UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA   (Canada)

ⁱ NewYork Presbyterian Hospital   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BETA ADRENERGIC RECEPTOR BLOCKING AGENT;

CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASE; CARDIOVASCULAR MORTALITY; CARDIOVASCULAR RISK; CEREBROVASCULAR ACCIDENT; CLINICAL DECISION MAKING; COCHRANE LIBRARY; CONFIDENCE INTERVAL; EMBASE; HEART INFARCTION; HUMAN; MEDICAL LITERATURE; MEDLINE; META ANALYSIS (TOPIC); PATIENT CARE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUBLISHING; RANDOM ERROR; RELIABILITY; REPRODUCIBILITY; REVIEW; SELECTION BIAS; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW (TOPIC); TREATMENT OUTCOME;

BIAS (EPIDEMIOLOGY); DECISION MAKING; EVIDENCE-BASED PRACTICE; HUMANS; META-ANALYSIS AS TOPIC; PATIENT CARE; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; REVIEW LITERATURE AS TOPIC;

EID: 84903897703     PISSN: 00987484     EISSN: 15383598     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1001/jama.2014.5559     Document Type: Review

References (52)

1. Bouri S, Shun-Shin MJ, Cole GD, Mayet J, Francis DP. Meta-analysis of secure randomised controlled trials of β-blockade to prevent perioperative death in non-cardiac surgery. Heart. 2014;100(6):456-464.
2. Oxman AD, Cook DJ, Guyatt GH; Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. Users' guides to the medical literature, VI: how to use an overview. JAMA. 1994;272(17):1367-1371. (Pubitemid 24323620)
3. Alkin M. Evaluation Roots: Tracing Theorists' Views and Influences. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications Inc; 2004.
4. Oxman AD. Checklists for review articles. BMJ. 1994;309(6955):648-651. (Pubitemid 24281192)
5. Balshem H, Helfand M, Schünemann HJ, et al. GRADE guidelines, 3: rating the quality of evidence. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64(4):401-406.
6. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Version 5.1.0 ed. Chichester, United Kingdom: John Wiley & Sons Ltd; 2011.
7. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG; PRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. J Clin Epidemiol. 2009;62(10):1006-1012.
8. Murad MH, Montori VM. Synthesizing evidence: shifting the focus from individual studies to the body of evidence. JAMA. 2013;309(21):2217-2218.
9. Hopewell S, Clarke M, Lefebvre C, Scherer R. Handsearching versus electronic searching to identify reports of randomized trials. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007;(2):MR000001.
10. Egger M, Juni P, Bartlett C, Holenstein F, Sterne J. How important are comprehensive literature searches and the assessment of trial quality in systematic reviews? empirical study. Health Technol Assess. 2003;7(1):1-76.
11. Livingston EH, Elliot A, Hynan L, Cao J. Effect size estimation: a necessary component of statistical analysis. Arch Surg. 2009;144(8):706-712.
12. Devereaux PJ, Yang H, Yusuf S, et al; POISE Study Group. Effects of extended-release metoprolol succinate in patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery (POISE trial): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2008;371(9627):1839-1847.
13. Murad MH, Montori VM, Walter SD, Guyatt GH. Estimating risk difference from relative association measures in meta-analysis can infrequently pose interpretational challenges. J Clin Epidemiol. 2009;62(8):865-867.
14. Guyatt GH, Eikelboom JW, Gould MK, et al; American College of Chest Physicians. Approach to outcome measurement in the prevention of thrombosis in surgical and medical patients: Antithrombotic Therapy and Prevention of Thrombosis, 9th ed: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines. Chest. 2012;141(2)(suppl):e185S-e194S.
15. Taylor F, Huffman MD, Macedo AF, et al. Statins for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;1:CD004816.
16. Lacasse Y, Martin S, Lasserson TJ, Goldstein RS. Meta-analysis of respiratory rehabilitation in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a Cochrane systematic review. Eura Medicophys. 2007;43(4):475-485.
17. Johnston BC, Patrick DL, Thorlund K, et al. Patient-reported outcomes inmeta-analyses-part 2: methods for improving interpretability for decision-makers. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2013;11:211.
18. US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF). Grade Definitions. USPSTF website. http://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/uspstf/grades.htm. Accessed May 23, 2014.
19. Jacobs AK, Kushner FG, Ettinger SM, et al. ACCF/AHA clinical practice guideline methodology summit report: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. Circulation. 2013;127(2):268-310.
20. Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine (OECBM) Levels of Evidence Working Group. OECBM 2011 Levels of Evidence. OECBM website. http://www.cebm.net/mod-product/design/files/CEBM-Levels-of-Evidence-2.1.pdf. 2011. Accessed May 25, 2014.
21. Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Vist GE, et al; GRADE Working Group. GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ. 2008;336(7650):924-926. (Pubitemid 351632017)
22. 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(9128):609-613. (Pubitemid 28380142)
23. Odgaard-Jensen J, Vist GE, Timmer A, et al. Randomisation to protect against selection bias in healthcare trials. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011;(4):MR000012.
24. Klein EA, Thompson IM Jr, Tangen CM, et al. Vitamin E and the risk of prostate cancer: the Selenium and Vitamin E Cancer Prevention Trial (SELECT). JAMA. 2011;306(14):1549-1556.
25. Sesso HD, Buring JE, Christen WG, et al. Vitamins E and C in the prevention of cardiovascular disease in men: the Physicians' Health Study II randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2008;300(18):2123-2133.
26. Jüni P, Witschi A, Bloch R, Egger M. The hazards of scoring the quality of clinical trials for meta-analysis. JAMA. 1999;282(11):1054-1060. (Pubitemid 29436453)
27. Higgins JP, Altman DG, Gøtzsche PC, et al; Cochrane Bias Methods Group; Cochrane Statistical Methods Group. The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ. 2011;343:d5928.
28. Hatala R, Keitz S, Wyer P, Guyatt G; Evidence-Based Medicine Teaching Tips Working Group. Tips for learners of evidence-based medicine, 4: assessing heterogeneity of primary studies in systematic reviews and whether to combine their results. CMAJ. 2005;172(5):661-665. (Pubitemid 40342102)
29. Lau J, Ioannidis JP, Schmid CH. Quantitative synthesis in systematic reviews. Ann Intern Med. 1997;127(9):820-826. (Pubitemid 27465551)
30. Higgins JP, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, Altman DG. Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ. 2003;327(7414):557-560.
31. Altman DG, Bland JM. Interaction revisited: the difference between two estimates. BMJ. 2003;326(7382):219. (Pubitemid 36143396)
32. Navarese EP, Kowalewski M, Andreotti F, et al. Meta-analysis of time-related benefits of statin therapy in patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Am J Cardiol. 2014;113(10):1753-1764.
33. Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Kunz R, et al; GRADE Working Group. GRADE guidelines, 7: rating the quality of evidence - inconsistency. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64(12):1294-1302.
34. Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Kunz R, et al. GRADE guidelines, 6: rating the quality of evidence-imprecision. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64(12):1283-1293.
35. Dunkelgrun M, Boersma E, Schouten O, et al; Dutch Echocardiographic Cardiac Risk Evaluation Applying Stress Echocardiography Study Group. Bisoprolol and fluvastatin for the reduction of perioperative cardiac mortality and myocardial infarction in intermediate-risk patients undergoing noncardiovascular surgery: a randomized controlled trial (DECREASE-IV). Ann Surg. 2009;249(6):921-926.
36. Poldermans D, Boersma E, Bax JJ, et al; Dutch Echocardiographic Cardiac Risk Evaluation Applying Stress Echocardiography Study Group. The effect of bisoprolol on perioperative mortality and myocardial infarction in high-risk patients undergoing vascular surgery. N Engl J Med. 1999;341(24):1789-1794.
37. Murad MH, Shah ND, Van Houten HK, et al. Individuals with diabetes preferred that future trials use patient-important outcomes and provide pragmatic inferences. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64(7):743-748.
38. Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Kunz R, et al; GRADE Working Group. GRADE guidelines, 8: rating the quality of evidence - indirectness. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64(12):1303-1310.
39. Murad MH, Drake MT, Mullan RJ, et al. Comparative effectiveness of drug treatments to prevent fragility fractures: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2012;97(6):1871-1880.
40. Mills EJ, Ioannidis JP, Thorlund K, Schünemann HJ, Puhan MA, Guyatt GH. How to use an article reporting a multiple treatment comparison meta-analysis. JAMA. 2012;308(12):1246-1253.
41. Easterbrook PJ, Berlin JA, Gopalan R, Matthews DR. Publication bias in clinical research. Lancet. 1991;337(8746):867-872.
42. Stern JM, Simes RJ. Publication bias: evidence of delayed publication in a cohort study of clinical research projects. BMJ. 1997;315(7109):640-645. (Pubitemid 27387174)
43. Chan AW, Hróbjartsson A, Haahr MT, Gøtzsche PC, Altman DG. Empirical evidence for selective reporting of outcomes in randomized trials: comparison of protocols to published articles. JAMA. 2004;291(20):2457-2465. (Pubitemid 38669189)
44. Saquib N, Saquib J, Ioannidis JP. Practices and impact of primary outcome adjustment in randomized controlled trials: meta-epidemiologic study. BMJ. 2013;347:f4313.
45. McDonagh MS, Peterson K, Balshem H, Helfand M. US Food and Drug Administration documents can provide unpublished evidence relevant to systematic reviews. J Clin Epidemiol. 2013;66(10):1071-1081.
46. Eyding D, Lelgemann M, Grouven U, et al. Reboxetine for acute treatment of major depression: systematic review and meta-analysis of published and unpublished placebo and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor controlled trials. BMJ. 2010;341:c4737.
47. Lau J, Ioannidis JP, Terrin N, Schmid CH, Olkin I. The case of the misleading funnel plot. BMJ. 2006;333(7568):597-600. (Pubitemid 44433638)
48. Boissel JP, Haugh MC. Clinical trial registries and ethics review boards: the results of a survey by the FICHTRE project. Fundam Clin Pharmacol. 1997;11(3):281-284. (Pubitemid 27279921)
49. Horton R, Smith R. Time to register randomised trials: the case is now unanswerable. BMJ. 1999;319(7214):865-866. (Pubitemid 29457408)
50. Dickersin K, Rennie D. The evolution of trial registries and their use to assess the clinical trial enterprise. JAMA. 2012;307(17):1861-1864.
51. Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Montori V, et al. GRADE guidelines, 5: rating the quality of evidence - publication bias. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64(12):1277-1282.
52. Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Sultan S, et al; GRADE Working Group. GRADE guidelines, 9: rating up the quality of evidence. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64(12):1311-1316.