Gartlehner, G. and Wild, C. and Mad, P. (2008): [Systematic reviews and meta-analyses]. WMW: Wiener Medizinische Wochenschrift 158 (3-4): 127-133.
Full text not available from this repository.
Official URL: http://www.springerlink.com/content/112449/
Over the past years, systematic reviews and meta-analyses have led to significant changes in clinical medicine and health policy. To date, they can be viewed as the most objective instruments to answer clinical as well health policy questions. In addition, systematic reviews are an important tool to synthesize the enormous amount of new medical knowledge into a manageable format. Nevertheless, the methodological quality of published systematic reviews and meta-analyses varies and biased results can be misleading. Therefore, it is important for readers of systematic reviews to critically evaluate the underlying methods, to be able to assess the validity of their findings. This manuscript is part of a methods series of the Wiener Medizinische Wochenschrift. It summarizes the methodological hallmarks of systematic reviews and meta-analyses to provide readers with the methodological background necessary to critically evaluate systematic reviews and meta-analyses.
|Keywords:||Clinical studies, methodology, clinical research, systematic review, meta-analysis, critical appraisal|
|Subjects:||WB Practice of medicine > WB 102 Evidence-based medicine|
WA Public health > WA 900-950 Statistics. Surveys
|Deposited on:||27 Mar 2008 18:08|
|Last Modified:||10 Nov 2008 19:17|
Repository Staff Only: item control page