Meta-analysis: the glass eye of evidence-based practice?

Area of Science:

• Evidence-based practice
• Quantitative research methods
• Philosophy of science

Background:

• Meta-analysis is a statistical technique for combining results from multiple quantitative studies.
• It is frequently employed to estimate causal relationships or associations between variables.
• Meta-analysis is often considered a cornerstone of evidence-based practice.

Purpose of the Study:

• To highlight an epistemological and methodological incompatibility between quantitative meta-analysis and expert practice.
• To propose an alternative philosophical framework for understanding meta-analysis.
• To reconcile meta-analysis with clinical reasoning in expert practice.

Main Methods:

• Critique of the correspondence theory of truth as applied to meta-analysis.
• Exploration of coherence theory of truth as a more compatible framework.
• Development of a conceptual model for meta-analysis based on coherence.

Main Results:

• Quantitative meta-analysis often relies on a 'truth as correspondence' epistemology, which conflicts with expert reasoning.
• Adopting a 'truth as coherence' framework resolves this incompatibility.
• A coherence-based approach to meta-analysis aligns with the nuanced reasoning of expert practitioners.

Conclusions:

• Meta-analysis can be reconceptualized beyond a purely mathematical procedure.
• Understanding meta-analysis through coherence enhances its consistency with expert clinical judgment.
• This reframing supports a more integrated approach to evidence synthesis and clinical practice.