Scientific article
English

Primer: strengths and weaknesses of meta-analysis

Published in

Nature clinical practice rheumatology, vol. 4, no. 3, p. 146-152

Publication date

2008

Abstract

Properly conducted meta-analyses that are based on systematic reviews of the literature allow the conclusive synthesis of accumulating scientific evidence. Systematic reviews, with or without meta-analyses, offer a more objective appraisal of the available evidence compared with traditional narrative reviews. Combining data from independent studies using meta-analytic methods can improve statistical precision, but cannot prevent bias as such. The validity of meta-analyses depends on the methodological quality of the included studies, the eligibility criteria used for the meta-analysis, and the various reporting biases. In this Review we examine the analytical strengths of, and the main problems encountered by, both systematic reviews and meta-analyses, focusing on how to best assess the validity of each for the practicing clinician.

Keywords

  • Clinical Trials as Topic
  • Evidence-Based Medicine
  • Humans
  • Meta-Analysis as Topic
  • Publication Bias
  • Quality Control
  • Review Literature as Topic

Citation (ISO format)

FINCKH, Axel, TRAMER, Martin. Primer: strengths and weaknesses of meta-analysis. In: Nature clinical practice rheumatology, 2008, vol. 4, n° 3, p. 146–152. doi: 10.1038/ncprheum0732

Main files (1)

Article (Accepted version)

Identifiers

Journal ISSN

1745-8382
687views
0downloads

Technical informations

Creation

22/05/2009 17:29:00

First validation

22/05/2009 17:29:00

Update

24/01/2025 14:44:37

Status update

24/01/2025 14:44:37

Last indexation

24/01/2025 14:49:14
All rights reserved by Archive ouverte UNIGE and the University of Geneva
OpenAIRE Indexed & Validated