Identification of application and interpretation errors that can occur in pairwise meta-analyses in systematic reviews of interventions: a systematic review

Meta-Analyses under the Microscope: Strengthening Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses in Andrology through Methodological Rigor

“…A recent systematic review of articles that evaluated the main errors made during a meta-analysis tried to summarize all the main mistakes identified in SRMAs. The authors presented 139 common mistakes, of which 25 covered data extraction, 74 covered statistical analyses, and 40 covered interpretation [ 19 ].…”

“…This is a common mistake made by many authors writing SRMAs, as the decision of which model to use for combining studies should not rely solely on the value of the heterogeneity test, but rather on the inferences drawn from it and the presence of clinical heterogeneity [ 21 ]. Sensitivity analyses, which could be used to test how the inclusion or exclusion of certain studies affects the final conclusions, are sometimes completely absent in some meta-analyses [ 19 ].…”

Meta-Analyses under the Microscope: Strengthening Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses in Andrology through Methodological Rigor

“…A recent systematic review of articles that evaluated the main errors made during a meta-analysis tried to summarize all the main mistakes identified in SRMAs. The authors presented 139 common mistakes, of which 25 covered data extraction, 74 covered statistical analyses, and 40 covered interpretation [ 19 ].…”

“…This is a common mistake made by many authors writing SRMAs, as the decision of which model to use for combining studies should not rely solely on the value of the heterogeneity test, but rather on the inferences drawn from it and the presence of clinical heterogeneity [ 21 ]. Sensitivity analyses, which could be used to test how the inclusion or exclusion of certain studies affects the final conclusions, are sometimes completely absent in some meta-analyses [ 19 ].…”

Meta-Analyses under the Microscope: Strengthening Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses in Andrology through Methodological Rigor

“…A recent systematic review of articles that evaluated the main errors made during a meta-analysis tried to summarize all the main mistakes identified in SRMAs. The authors presented 139 common mistakes, of which 25 covered data extraction, 74 covered statistical analyses, and 40 covered interpretation [ 19 ].…”

“…This is a common mistake made by many authors writing SRMAs, as the decision of which model to use for combining studies should not rely solely on the value of the heterogeneity test, but rather on the inferences drawn from it and the presence of clinical heterogeneity [ 21 ]. Sensitivity analyses, which could be used to test how the inclusion or exclusion of certain studies affects the final conclusions, are sometimes completely absent in some meta-analyses [ 19 ].…”

Meta-Analyses under the Microscope: Strengthening Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses in Andrology through Methodological Rigor

“…A recent systematic review of articles that evaluated the main errors made during a meta-analysis tried to summarize all the main mistakes identified in SRMAs. The authors presented 139 common mistakes, of which 25 covered data extraction, 74 covered statistical analyses, and 40 covered interpretation [ 19 ].…”

“…This is a common mistake made by many authors writing SRMAs, as the decision of which model to use for combining studies should not rely solely on the value of the heterogeneity test, but rather on the inferences drawn from it and the presence of clinical heterogeneity [ 21 ]. Sensitivity analyses, which could be used to test how the inclusion or exclusion of certain studies affects the final conclusions, are sometimes completely absent in some meta-analyses [ 19 ].…”