Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Misunderstanding meta-analysis.

R L Bangert-Drowns1

  • 1State University of New York at Albany, USA.

Evaluation & the Health Professions
|August 6, 1995
PubMed
Summary

Meta-analysis, a common research strategy, is often misunderstood. This article clarifies common misconceptions about meta-analysis and its relationship with primary research.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Meta-analysis without the mantra: a reply to Wilson and "weighted analysis".

Addiction (Abingdon, England)·2001
Same author

Some limiting factors in meta-analysis.

NIDA research monograph·1997
Same author

The effects of school-based substance abuse education--meta-analysis.

Journal of drug education·1988
See all related articles

Area of Science:

  • Research Methodology
  • Biostatistics
  • Evidence Synthesis

Background:

  • Meta-analysis is a growing research strategy but is relatively new.
  • Common misunderstandings exist regarding its conduct, interpretation, and relation to other research methods.
  • Early enthusiasm may have led to overstated contributions, fostering misconceptions.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To highlight common misunderstandings surrounding meta-analysis.
  • To offer an alternative perspective on the meta-analytic approach.
  • To reframe the value of meta-analysis in scientific inquiry.

Main Methods:

  • Conceptual analysis of meta-analytic practices.
  • Review of existing literature on meta-analysis and its interpretation.
  • Comparative analysis with primary research and narrative reviews.

Main Results:

  • Identified several common misunderstandings about meta-analysis conduct and interpretation.
  • Clarified the relationship between meta-analysis, primary research, and narrative review.
  • Proposed a view of meta-analysis as a complementary tool rather than a definitive one.

Conclusions:

  • Meta-analysis is prone to misunderstandings due to its relative newness.
  • Future meta-analytic research should emphasize partnership with primary research.
  • Meta-analysis should be valued for generating creative hypotheses rather than definitive conclusions.

Related Experiment Videos