Conducting systematic reviews of association (etiology): The Joanna Briggs Institute's approach

International Journal of Evidence-Based Healthcare

Volumn 13, Issue 3, 2015, Pages 163-169

  Moola, Sandeep ^a   Munn, Zachary ^a   Sears, Kim ^b   Sfetcu, Raluca ^c   Currie, Marian ^d   Lisy, Karolina ^a   Tufanaru, Catalin ^a   Qureshi, Rubab ^e   Mattis, Patrick ^e   Mu, Peifan ^f  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ADELAIDE   (Australia)

^b QUEEN S UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^c An Affiliate Centre of The Joanna Briggs Institute   (Romania)

^d AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

^e New Jersey   (United States)

^f NATIONAL YANG MING UNIVERSITY   (Taiwan)

Author keywords

Association; Correlation; Etiology; Joanna Briggs Institute; Research methodology; Risk; Systematic reviews

Indexed keywords

EMPIRICAL RESEARCH; EPIDEMIOLOGY; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; HUMAN; LITERATURE; METHODOLOGY; ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; STANDARDS; STATISTICAL BIAS;

BIAS (EPIDEMIOLOGY); CAUSALITY; EMPIRICAL RESEARCH; EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; GUIDELINES AS TOPIC; HUMANS; RESEARCH DESIGN; REVIEW LITERATURE AS TOPIC;

EID: 84966393208     PISSN: 17441595     EISSN: 17441609     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/XEB.0000000000000064     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. Munn Z, Tufanaru C, Aromataris E. JBI's systematic reviews: data extraction and synthesis. Am J Nurs 2014; 114: 49-54
2. Joanna Briggs Institute. Joanna Briggs Institute Reviewers' Manual: 2014 edition. The Joanna Briggs Institute. Australia;. 2014 Available from http://www.joannabriggs.org/sumari. html
3. Normand SL. Meta-analysis: formulating, evaluating, combining, and reporting. Stat Med 1999; 18: 321-59
4. Sutton AJ, Abrams KR, Jones DR, Sheldon TA, Song F. Methods for Meta-analysis in medical research. Chichester: Wiley; 2000
5. Hill AB. The environment and disease: association or causation? Proc Roy Soc Med 1965; 58: 295-300
6. Hedges L, Olkin I. Statistical methods for meta-analysis. 1st ed. London: Academic Press; 1985
7. Rosenthal R, Rubin DB. Interpersonal expectancy effects: the first 345 studies. Behav Brain Sci 1978; 1: 377-86
8. Field AP. Meta-analysis of correlation coefficients: a Monte Carlo comparison of fixed-and random-effects methods. Psychol Methods 2001; 6: 161-80
9. Lucas PJ, Baird J, Arai L, Law C, Roberts HM. Worked examples of alternative methods for the synthesis of qualitative and quantitative research in systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol 2007; 7: 4
10. Lockwood C, White S. Synthesizing descriptive evidence. Philadelphia: WKH/Lippincott Williams and Wilkins; Joanna Briggs Institute; 2012
11. Khan K KR, Kleijnen J, Antes G. Systematic reviews to support evidence-based medicine. 2nd ed. London: Royal Society of Medicine; 2011
12. Tufte ER. The visual display of quantitative information. 2nd ed. Connecticut: Graphics Press; 2001
13. Ogilvie D, Fayter D, Petticrew M, et al. The harvest plot: a method for synthesising evidence about the differential effects of interventions. BMC Med Res Methodol 2008; 8: 8
14. National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC). How to review the evidence: systematic identification and review of the scientific literature. Australia: NHMRC; 1999
15. Higgins JPT, Green S (editors). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Available from www.cochrane-handbook.org