Journals / Anestezi Dergisi / 2019 / Cilt: 27 - Sayı: 1

Meta-Analysis: A Review Article

Meta-Analiz: Bir Derleme

Pages
1–8
Publication Date
2022-10-10
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

However, there can be misleading if the studies includedare non-similar in their research question or collect different types of outcome data.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Meta-analysis is a frequently used statistical technique which uses to combine data from severalstudies to evaluate the effectiveness of treatment interventions.
📊
Key Findings & Data:By combining results from independent studies, we can both increase power of the study (over individual studies) and improveestimates of the size of the effect.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:However, there can be misleading if the studies includedare non-similar in their research question or collect different types of outcome data.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Meta-analysis is a frequently used statistical technique which uses to combine data from severalstudies to evaluate the effectiveness of treatment interventions. By combining results from independent studies, we can both increase power of the study (over individual studies) and improveestimates of the size of the effect. The processes of conducting meta-analysis include developinga protocol, selecting articles, developing inclusion criteria, collecting data, data analysis andinterpreting results. A major limitation of the meta-analysis is that only relevant studies whichhave retrievable data can be included for analysis. This causes concern for publication bias. It isobvious that metaanalysis is a useful scientific method that can provide important informationwhen summarizing medical literature. However, there can be misleading if the studies includedare non-similar in their research question or collect different types of outcome data.

Özet

Meta-analiz, birçok çalışmadaki verileri birleştirmek ve tedavi müdahalelerinin etkinliğini değerlendirmek için sık kullanılan bir istatistiksel tekniktir. Bağımsız çalışmalardan elde edilen sonuçları birleştirerek hem çalışmanın gücünü artırabilir (bireysel çalışmalara göre) hem de effect size tahminlerini iyileştirebilir. Meta-analiz yürütme süreçleri arasında bir protokol geliştirmek, makaleler seçmek, dahil edilme kriterleri geliştirmek, veri toplamak, veri analizi yapmak ve sonuçları yorumlamak bulunmaktadır. Meta-analizin önemli bir limitasyonu, sadece analiz için geri alınabilir verilere sahip ilgili çalışmaların dahil edilebilmesidir. Bu durum publication(yayin) bias için endişe yaratmaktadir. Meta-analizin, tıp literatürünü özetlerken önemli bilgiler sağlayabilecek tam olarak faydalı bir bilimsel yöntem olduğu oldukça açıktır. Bununla birlikte, dahil edilen araştırmaların araştırma sorusuyla aynı olmadığı veya farklı sonuç verileri topladığı takdirde yanıltıcı olabilir.

🔖

Cite This Article

İNCE, İ., OZCİMEN, E., TURAN, A. (2022). Meta-Analysis: A Review Article. Anestezi Dergisi, Cilt: 27 - Sayı: 1, 1–8. https://ajindex.com/articles/440494

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (11)

  1. Glasser SP. Essentials of Clinical Research. P:159-176. Springer Science, 2008; 159-76. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-8486-7_10
  2. Greenland S, O’ Rourke K. Meta-Analysis. Modern Epidemiology, 3rd ed. Edited by Rothman KJ, Greenland S, Lash T. Lippincott Williams and Wilkins; 2008; 652. Pearson K. Report on certain enteric fever inoculation statistics. Bri Med J. 1904;3:1243-6. Beecher HK. The powerful placebo. J Am Med Assoc. 1955;159:1602-6. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.1955.02960340022006 “Archie Cochrane: The name behind Cochrane”. www. cochrane.org. Cochrane Collaboration. 5 December 2013. Retrieved 10 September 2014.
  3. Stewart L, Moher D, Shekelle P. Why prospective registration of systematic reviews makes sense. Syst Rev. 2012;9:1-7. https://doi.org/10.1186/2046-4053-1-7
  4. Arthur W, Bennett W, Huffcutt AI. Conducting MetaAnalysis Using SAS. Mahwah, N.J.: Psychology Press 2001.
  5. Fazalare JA, Griesser MJ, Siston RA, Flanigan DC. The use of continuous passive motion following knee cartilage defect surgery: a systematic review. Orthopedics. 2010;33:878. https://doi.org/10.3928/01477447-20101021-16
  6. Quatman CE, Quatman-Yates CC, Schmitt LC, Paterno MV. The clinical utility and diagnostic performance of MRI for identification and classification of knee osteochondritis dissecans. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2012;94:1036- 44. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.K.00275
  7. Mulla SM, Wang L, Khokhar R, et al. Management of Central Poststroke Pain: Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials. Stroke. 2015;46:2853- 60. https://doi.org/10.1161/STROKEAHA.115.010259
  8. Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carroll D, et al. Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary? Controlled Clinical Trials. 1996;17:1-12. https://doi.org/10.1016/0197-2456(95)00134-4
  9. Dhammi IK, Haq RU. How to Write Systematic Review or Metaanalysis. Indian J Orthop. 2018;52:575-7. https://doi.org/10.4103/ortho.IJOrtho_557_18
  10. Dickersin, Min, & Meinert, 1992 Hedges LV. Estimation of effect size under non-random sampling: The effects of censoring studies yielding statistically insignificant mean differences. Journal of Educational Statistics. 1984;9:61-85. https://doi.org/10.2307/1164832 Rosenthal R. The file drawer problem and tolerance for null results. Psychological Bulletin. 1979;86:638-41. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.86.3.638 Greenwald AG. Consequences of prejudice against null hypothesis. Psychological Bulletin. 1975;82:1-19. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0076157
  11. Coursol A, Wagner EE