Meta‐Analysis: Whither Narrative Review?

Teagarden, J. Russell

doi:10.1002/j.1875-9114.1989.tb04139.x

Cited by 47 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Such an approach has been recognised to be subjective and therefore prone to bias and error. 284 Hence, it is possible that the selection of evidence in the included studies may have been biased. This is a weakness observed in economic evaluations of other treatment conditions.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of screening for open angle glaucoma: a systematic review and economic evaluation

Burr¹,

Mowatt²,

Hernández³

et al. 2007

Health Technol Assess

329

380

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Non-UK purchasers will have to pay a small fee for post and packing. For European countries the cost is £2 per monograph and for the rest of the world £3 per monograph.You can order HTA monographs from our Despatch Agents:-fax (with credit card or official purchase order) -post (with credit card or official purchase order or cheque) -phone during office hours (credit card only).Additionally the HTA website allows you either to pay securely by credit card or to print out your order and then post or fax it. NHS libraries can subscribe free of charge. Public libraries can subscribe at a very reduced cost of £100 for each volume (normally comprising 30-40 titles). The commercial subscription rate is £300 per volume. Please see our website for details. Subscriptions can only be purchased for the current or forthcoming volume. Contact details are as follows: Payment methods Paying by chequeIf you pay by cheque, the cheque must be in pounds sterling, made payable to Direct Mail Works Ltd and drawn on a bank with a UK address. Paying by credit cardThe following cards are accepted by phone, fax, post or via the website ordering pages: Delta, Eurocard, Mastercard, Solo, Switch and Visa. We advise against sending credit card details in a plain email. Paying by official purchase orderYou can post or fax these, but they must be from public bodies (i.e. NHS or universities) within the UK. We cannot at present accept purchase orders from commercial companies or from outside the UK. How do I get a copy of HTA on CD?Please use the form on the HTA website (www.hta.ac.uk/htacd.htm). Or contact Direct Mail Works (see contact details above) by email, post, fax or phone. HTA on CD is currently free of charge worldwide.The website also provides information about the HTA Programme and lists the membership of the various committees. HTA NIHR Health Technology Assessment ProgrammeT he Health Technology Assessment (HTA) programme, now part of the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), was set up in 1993. It produces high-quality research information on the costs, effectiveness and broader impact of health technologies for those who use, manage and provide care in the NHS. 'Health technologies' are broadly defined to include all interventions used to promote health, prevent and treat disease, and improve rehabilitation and long-term care, rather than settings of care. The research findings from the HTA Programme directly influence decision-making bodies such as the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) and the National Screening Committee (NSC). HTA findings also help to improve the quality of clinical practice in the NHS indirectly in that they form a key component of the 'National Knowledge Service'. The HTA Programme is needs-led in that it fills gaps in the evidence needed by the NHS. There are three routes to the start of projects. First is the commissioned route. Suggestions for research are actively sought from people working in the NHS, the public and consumer groups and professional bodies such as r...

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of screening for open angle glaucoma: a systematic review and economic evaluation

Burr¹,

Mowatt²,

Hernández³

et al. 2007

Health Technol Assess

329

380

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…First, the conventional narrative review is subjective and therefore prone to bias and error 9 . Mulrow showed that all but one of 50 reviews published in the mid-1980s in leading general medicine journals did not specify the source of the information and failed to perform a standardised assessment of the methodological quality of studies 10 .…”

Section: Limitations Of Traditional Reviewsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Uses and abuses of meta-analysis

2001

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

-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. Many of the groups ... are far too small to allow of any

show abstract

“…Therefore, the results presented in these observational studies are not consistent. Most of the previous reviews were not carried out systematically, so they are prone to bias (23). Only two of the reviews have quantified the association between noise and cardiovascular disease (3,24).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A meta-analysis or quantitative overview is a systematic review that employs statistical methods to combine and summarize data from several studies (23). By means of a meta-analysis we can also gain more insight into the sources of heterogeneity among study results: The findings of observational studies are often distorted by different sources of bias (25), causing a fair amount of heterogeneous variation on study level (26).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The association between noise exposure and blood pressure and ischemic heart disease: a meta-analysis.

Kempen

Kruize

Boshuizen

et al. 2002

Environ Health Perspect

394

253

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It has been suggested that noise exposure is associated with blood pressure changes and ischemic heart disease risk, but epidemiologic evidence is still limited. Furthermore, most reviews investigating these relations were not carried out in a systematic way, which makes them more prone to bias. We conducted a meta-analysis of 43 epidemiologic studies published between 1970 and 1999 that investigate the relation between noise exposure (both occupational and community) and blood pressure and/or ischemic heart disease (International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, codes 410-414). We studied a wide range of effects, from blood pressure changes to a myocardial infarction. With respect to the association between noise exposure and blood pressure, small blood pressure differences were evident. Our meta-analysis showed a significant association for both occupational noise exposure and air traffic noise exposure and hypertension: We estimated relative risks per 5 dB(A) noise increase of 1.14 (1.01-1.29) and 1.26 (1.14-1.39), respectively. Air traffic noise exposure was positively associated with the consultation of a general practitioner or specialist, the use of cardiovascular medicines, and angina pectoris. In cross-sectional studies, road traffic noise exposure increases the risk of myocardial infarction and total ischemic heart disease. Although we can conclude that noise exposure can contribute to the prevalence of cardiovascular disease, the evidence for a relation between noise exposure and ischemic heart disease is still inconclusive because of the limitations in exposure characterization, adjustment for important confounders, and the occurrence of publication bias.

show abstract

Meta‐Analysis: Whither Narrative Review?

Cited by 47 publications

References 44 publications

The clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of screening for open angle glaucoma: a systematic review and economic evaluation

The clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of screening for open angle glaucoma: a systematic review and economic evaluation

Uses and abuses of meta-analysis

The association between noise exposure and blood pressure and ischemic heart disease: a meta-analysis.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About