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

Individual patient data meta-analyses.

Michael J Clarke1

  • 1Clinical Trial Service Unit, Radcliffe Infirmary, Oxford OX2 6HE, UK. mclarke@cochrane.co.uk

Best Practice & Research. Clinical Obstetrics & Gynaecology
|March 8, 2005
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

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

Safety of limb-salvaging surgery for sarcomas compromising major vessels: A 15-year single-centre outcomes study.

Journal of plastic, reconstructive & aesthetic surgery : JPRAS·2021
Same author

Operative and 1-Year Outcomes of the Custom-Made Fenestrated Anaconda Aortic Stent Graft-A UK Multicenter Study.

Annals of vascular surgery·2017
Same author

Celiac and Superior/Inferior Mesenteric Angioplasty and Stenting for Chronic Mesenteric Ischemia: A Single-Center Experience.

Angiology·2016
Same author

Effect of normative masculinity on males' dysfunctional sexual beliefs, sexual attitudes, and perceptions of sexual functioning.

Journal of sex research·2014
Same author

Multiple mycotic aneurysms infected with Haemophilus influenzae.

Annals of vascular surgery·2014
Same author

Second Evidence Aid Conference: prioritizing evidence in disaster aid.

Disaster medicine and public health preparedness·2014
Same journal

A risk-based classification of late-onset fetal growth disorders according to intrapartum fetal compromise.

Best practice & research. Clinical obstetrics & gynaecology·2026
Same journal

The Cardiac-Fetal-Placental Unit: links between umbilical venous flow and maternal hemodynamics in fetal growth restriction.

Best practice & research. Clinical obstetrics & gynaecology·2026
Same journal

Psychosocial interventions for women who are pregnant following a previous reproductive loss: A scoping review.

Best practice & research. Clinical obstetrics & gynaecology·2026
Same journal

Controversies in fetal therapy.

Best practice & research. Clinical obstetrics & gynaecology·2026
Same journal

Alloimmunisation in pregnancy: current management and future perspectives.

Best practice & research. Clinical obstetrics & gynaecology·2026
Same journal

Consensus in prenatal management of Hemolytic disease of the fetus and newborn.

Best practice & research. Clinical obstetrics & gynaecology·2026
See all related articles

Systematic reviews synthesize health evidence. Individual patient data reviews enhance this by collecting and analyzing data from each participant, overcoming limitations of published or aggregate data for more robust conclusions.

Area of Science:

  • Health Research Methodology
  • Evidence Synthesis
  • Clinical Trial Analysis

Background:

  • Systematic reviews are crucial for informed healthcare decisions.
  • They aim to synthesize all relevant evidence from eligible studies.
  • Traditional reviews often rely on published or aggregate data, which have limitations.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To discuss the rationale behind conducting systematic reviews using individual patient data (IPD).
  • To highlight the features and advantages of IPD systematic reviews.
  • To explain how IPD reviews overcome challenges in evidence synthesis.

Main Methods:

  • Centralized collection of individual patient-level data from relevant randomized trials.
  • Analysis of this comprehensive dataset to address review questions.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Comparison of IPD review methods with those using published or aggregate data.

    • Main Results:

    • IPD reviews allow for more thorough data analysis than traditional methods.
    • They overcome issues related to missing data and selective reporting in published studies.
    • IPD facilitates the exploration of participant-level effects and subgroup analyses.

    Conclusions:

    • Individual patient data systematic reviews represent a gold standard in evidence synthesis.
    • They provide a more complete and accurate picture of intervention effects.
    • This approach enhances the reliability and applicability of systematic review findings for healthcare decision-making.