Methods in Outcomes Research. Workshop. New Orleans, USA, 1998.
Systematic reviews have a central role in evidence-based medicine.
The quantitative systematic review, also known as meta-analysis, provides a logical structure for quantifying evidence and for exploring bias and diversity in research systematically.
It is essential that clinicians, educators, and researchers understand the methods that comprise this research tool, particularly the basic step-by-step process, and know when numerical pooling of data is appropriate.
The essay describes how systematic reviews are best conducted and when statistical pooling of data is appropriate.
Systematic reviews are scientific investigations with planned methods that use original studies as subjects and synthesize the results of multiple studies using strategies to limit bias and random error.
This process requires judgments to be made explicit, and should be question driven, protocol based, reproducible, and comprehensive in scope.
Meta-analysis provides a framework for research synthesis, increases power and precision, provides an overall estimate and range of effect, and identifies greater-than-expected variability among study results (heterogeneity).
Meta-analysis does not remove subjectivity from the process of synthesis, identify sources of variability among studies, or obviate the need for sound, compassionate clinical reasoning.
Statistical heterogeneity should be anticipated and welcomed. (...)
Mots-clés Pascal : Métaanalyse, Santé, Maladie, Synthèse documentaire, Indication, Intérêt, Méthodologie, Article synthèse, Homme, Science information
Mots-clés Pascal anglais : Metaanalysis, Health, Disease, Documentation synthesis, Indication, Interest, Methodology, Review, Human, Information science
Notice produite par :
Inist-CNRS - Institut de l'Information Scientifique et Technique
Cote : 99-0336193
Code Inist : 002B28F. Création : 16/11/1999.