PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 12897595

Methodologic issues in systematic reviews and meta-analyses.

Abstract

Systematic reviews of original research are increasing in number. Systematic reviews are distinct from narrative reviews because they address a specific clinical question, require a comprehensive literature search, use explicit selection criteria to identify relevant studies, assess the methodologic quality of included studies, explore differences among study results, and either qualitatively or quantitatively synthesize study results. Systematic reviews that quantitatively pool results of more than one study are called meta-analyses. Several organizations are collaboratively involved in producing high quality systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Familiarity with how to do a systematic review and meta-analysis will lead to greater skill in using this type of article. For clinicians, teachers, and investigators, systematic reviews and meta-analyses are useful sources of evidence.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Victor M Montori, Marc F Swiontkowski, Deborah J Cook. 2003. Methodologic issues in systematic reviews and meta-analyses.. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.blo.0000079322.41006.5b

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Efficient literature searching: a core skill for the practice of evidence-based medicine.

BACKGROUND: Efficient literature searching and the application of formal rules of evidence in evaluating the clinical literature are the two key skills defining the practice of evidence-based medicine. Although clinicians embrace the concepts of evidence-based medicine, most identify limited personal time as the major barrier towards its implementation into daily practice. Busy clinicians who practice evidence-based medicine identify systematic reviews and evidence-based clinical practice guidelines as very useful resources. METHODS: This review presents a simple, easy-to-follow, three-step searching strategy that emphasises the use of powerful new PubMed features that allow clinicians to retrieve high-quality systematic reviews, clinical practice guidelines and primary studies with a single mouse click. The overall effectiveness of the process is further improved by highlighting the major features of successful and unsuccessful literature searches. CONCLUSIONS: At the end of this tutorial the reader should be able to conduct efficient and effective literature searches that support clinical decision making in under 10 minutes.

Decision Making↗