Quantitative synthesis in systematic reviews

被引:2212
作者
Lau, J [1 ]
Ioannidis, JPA [1 ]
Schmid, CH [1 ]
机构
[1] TUFTS UNIV, SCH MED, BOSTON, MA 02111 USA
关键词
D O I
10.7326/0003-4819-127-9-199711010-00008
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
The final common pathway for most systematic reviews is a statistical summary of the data, or meta-analysis. The complex methods used in meta-analyses should always be complemented by clinical acumen and common sense in designing the protocol of a systematic review, deciding which data can be combined, and determining whether data should be combined. Both continuous and binary data can be pooled. Most meta-analyses summarize data from randomized trials, but other applications, such as the evaluation of diagnostic test performance and observational studies, have also been developed. The statistical methods of meta-analysis aim at evaluating the diversity (heterogeneity) among the results of different studies, exploring and explaining observed heterogeneity, and estimating a common pooled effect with increased precision. Fixed-effects models assume that an intervention has a single true effect, whereas random-effects models assume that an effect may vary across studies. Meta-regression analyses, by using each study rather than each patient as a unit of observation, can help to evaluate the effect of individual variables on the magnitude of an observed effect and thus may sometimes explain why study results differ. It is also important to assess the robustness of conclusions through sensitivity analyses and a formal evaluation of potential sources of bias, including publication bias and the effect of the quality of the studies on the observed effect.
引用
收藏
页码:820 / 826
页数:7
相关论文
共 64 条
[51]   COMBINING INDEPENDENT STUDIES OF A DIAGNOSTIC-TEST INTO A SUMMARY ROC CURVE - DATA-ANALYTIC APPROACHES AND SOME ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS [J].
MOSES, LE ;
SHAPIRO, D ;
LITTENBERG, B .
STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 1993, 12 (14) :1293-1316
[52]   ASSESSING QUALITY OF A DIAGNOSTIC-TEST EVALUATION [J].
MULROW, CD ;
LINN, WD ;
GAUL, MK ;
PUGH, JA .
JOURNAL OF GENERAL INTERNAL MEDICINE, 1989, 4 (04) :288-295
[53]   STATISTICAL AND THEORETICAL CONSIDERATIONS IN METAANALYSIS [J].
OLKIN, I .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 1995, 48 (01) :133-146
[54]   A CONSUMERS GUIDE TO SUBGROUP ANALYSES [J].
OXMAN, AD ;
GUYATT, GH .
ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, 1992, 116 (01) :78-84
[55]   EMPIRICAL-EVIDENCE OF BIAS - DIMENSIONS OF METHODOLOGICAL QUALITY ASSOCIATED WITH ESTIMATES OF TREATMENT EFFECTS IN CONTROLLED TRIALS [J].
SCHULZ, KF ;
CHALMERS, I ;
HAYES, RJ ;
ALTMAN, DG .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1995, 273 (05) :408-412
[56]   CLINICALLY USEFUL MEASURES OF EFFECT IN BINARY ANALYSES OF RANDOMIZED TRIALS [J].
SINCLAIR, JC ;
BRACKEN, MB .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 1994, 47 (08) :881-889
[57]   ON COMBINING DOSE-RESPONSE DATA FROM EPIDEMIOLOGIC STUDIES BY METAANALYSIS [J].
SMITH, SJ ;
CAUDILL, SP ;
STEINBERG, KK ;
THACKER, SB .
STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 1995, 14 (5-7) :531-544
[58]   Bayesian approaches to random-effects meta-analysis: A comparative study [J].
Smith, TC ;
Spiegelhalter, DJ ;
Thomas, A .
STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 1995, 14 (24) :2685-2699
[59]   PRACTICAL METHODOLOGY OF METAANALYSES (OVERVIEWS) USING UPDATED INDIVIDUAL PATIENT DATA [J].
STEWART, LA ;
CLARKE, MJ .
STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 1995, 14 (19) :2057-2079
[60]  
TRYBA M, 1991, J CLIN GASTROENTE S2, V3, P544