Systematic review and meta-analysis
Abstract
In this review the usual methods applied in systematic reviews and meta-analyses are outlined. The ideal hypothesis for a systematic review should be generated by information not used later in meta-analyses. The selection of studies involves searching in web repertories, and more than one should be consulted. A manual search in the references of articles, editorials, reviews, etc. is mandatory. The selection of studies should be made by two investigators on an independent basis. Data collection on quality of the selected reports is needed, applying validated scales and including specific questions on the main biases which could have a negative impact upon the research question. Such collection also should be carried out by two researchers on an independent basis. The most common procedures for combining studies with binary outcomes are described (inverse of variance, Mantel-Haenszel, and Peto), illustrating how they can be done using Stata commands. Assessment of heterogeneity and publication bias is also illustrated with the same program.
How strong is the evidence?
Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.
Read the paper
Related studies
- Challenges and opportunities with drug repurposing: finding strategies to find alternative uses of therapeutics
- Challenges in Chagas Disease Drug Development
- T Cell Specificity: A Great Challenge in Chagas Disease
- Benznidazole treatment leads to DNA damage in Trypanosoma cruzi and the persistence of rare widely dispersed non-replicative amastigotes in mice
- Rapid Molecular Detection of Terbinafine-resistant Dermatophytes
- Identifying novel drugs with new modes of action for neglected tropical fungal skin diseases (fungal skinNTDs) using an Open Source Drug discovery approach
Go deeper in Evidence Hub
Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.