Uses and abuses of meta-analysis
Abstract
Meta-analysis, the statistical combination of results from several studies to produce a single estimate of the effect of a treatment, continues to attract controversy. We illustrate the potentials and pitfalls of meta-analysis of controlled clinical trials. Cumulative meta-analysis demonstrates that this technique could prevent delays in the introduction of effective treatments. Meta-analyses are, however, liable to numerous biases both at the level of the individual trial (‘garbage in, garbage out’) and the dissemination of trial results (publication bias). We argue that meta-analysis should be performed only within the framework of systematic reviews - that is, reviews prepared using a systematic approach to minimise bias and address the combinability of studies.
- © 2001 Royal College of Physicians
Article Tools
Citation Manager Formats
Jump to section
Related Articles
- No related articles found.
Cited By...
- Making sense of phantom limb pain
- Excess Weight as a Risk Factor Common to Many Cancer Sites: Words of Caution when Interpreting Meta-analytic Evidence
- Validation of New Cancer Biomarkers: A Position Statement from the European Group on Tumor Markers
- Long-Term Effects of 4 Popular Diets on Weight Loss and Cardiovascular Risk Factors: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials
- Teledentistry: A Systematic Review of Clinical Outcomes, Utilization and Costs
- Doing More Harm than Good? Do Systematic Reviews of PET by Health Technology Assessment Agencies Provide an Appraisal of the Evidence That Is Closer to the Truth than the Primary Data Supporting Its Use?
- Thrombophilia and Pediatric Stroke
- Effect of Periodontal Treatment on Glycemic Control of Diabetic Patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis