Search research articles

ABOUT JoVE

Overview Leadership Blog JoVE Help Center

AUTHORS

Publishing Process Editorial Board Scope & Policies Peer Review FAQ Submit

LIBRARIANS

Testimonials Subscriptions Access Resources Library Advisory Board FAQ

RESEARCH

JoVE Journal Methods Collections JoVE Encyclopedia of Experiments Archive

EDUCATION

JoVE Core JoVE Business JoVE Science Education JoVE Lab Manual Faculty Resource Center Faculty Site

Terms & Conditions of Use

Related Concept Videos

The Scientific Method

The Scientific Method

The scientific method is a detailed, empirical problem-solving process used by biologists and other scientists. This iterative approach involves formulating a question based on observation, developing a testable potential explanation for the observation (called a hypothesis), making and testing predictions based on the hypothesis, and using the findings to create new hypotheses and predictions.
Generally, predictions are tested using carefully-designed experiments. Based on the outcome of these...

The Scientific Method

The Scientific Method

Research is what makes the difference between facts and opinions. Facts are observable realities, and opinions are personal judgments, conclusions, or attitudes that may or may not be accurate. In the scientific community, facts can be established only using evidence collected through empirical research.

Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches

Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches

Biopharmaceutical studies constitute a vital field aiming to enhance drug delivery methods and refine therapeutic approaches, drawing upon diverse interdisciplinary knowledge. In research methodologies, the choice between controlled and non-controlled studies significantly influences the study's reliability and accuracy.
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast, controlled...

Statistical Methods for Analyzing Epidemiological Data

Statistical Methods for Analyzing Epidemiological Data

Epidemiological data primarily involves information on specific populations' occurrence, distribution, and determinants of health and diseases. This data is crucial for understanding disease patterns and impacts, aiding public health decision-making and disease prevention strategies. The analysis of epidemiological data employs various statistical methods to interpret health-related data effectively. Here are some commonly used methods:

Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors

Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors

In the case of systematic errors, the sources can be identified, and the errors can be subsequently minimized by addressing these sources. According to the source, systematic errors can be divided into sampling, instrumental, methodological, and personal errors.
Sampling errors originate from improper sampling methods or the wrong sample population. These errors can be minimized by refining the sampling strategy. Defective instruments or faulty calibrations are the sources of instrumental...

Overview of Biostatistics in Health Sciences

Overview of Biostatistics in Health Sciences

Biostatistics involves the application of statistical techniques to scientific research in health-related fields, including biology and public health. These techniques are essential for designing studies, collecting data, and analyzing it to draw meaningful conclusions. Given the complexity of biological processes, particularly in studies involving human subjects, biostatistical methods are crucial for effectively organizing and interpreting data that might otherwise obscure underlying patterns...

You might also read

Related Articles

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

Sort by

Same author

Prevalence and clinical outcomes of eosinophilia in critically ill patients.

European annals of allergy and clinical immunology·2026

Same author

Beyond the Stethoscope: Robotic Empathy in Pediatric Cardiology. The Emerging Role of Social Robots. A Pilot Study.

Pediatric cardiology·2026

Same author

Unraveling the Impact of COVID-19 Lockdowns on Youth Sports and Physical Activity: Insights From a Retrospective Cohort Study in Italy.

International journal of pediatrics·2025

Same author

Novel therapies and interventions in sepsis and septic shock.

BJA education·2025

Same author

Halogenated anesthetics vs intravenous hypnotics for short and long term sedation in the intensive care unit: A meta-analysis.

Medicina intensiva·2022

Same author

A double-blind randomised feasibility trial of angiotensin-2 in cardiac surgery<sup></sup>.

Anaesthesia·2022

Search research articles

Related Experiment Videos

The rough guide to systematic reviews and meta-analyses.

G Biondi-Zoccai¹, M Lotrionte, G Landoni

¹Division of Cardiology, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Modena, Italy ; Meta-analysis and Evidence-based medicine Training in Cardiology (METCARDIO), Ospedaletti, Italy.

HSR Proceedings in Intensive Care & Cardiovascular Anesthesia

|February 27, 2013

Summary

This guide explains systematic reviews and meta-analyses, crucial for evidence-based medicine. Learn their pros and cons for better clinical decision-making and research design.

Keywords:

meta-analysis meta-regression systematic review

Related Experiment Videos

Area of Science:

Evidence-based medicine
Clinical research methodology

Background:

Systematic reviews and meta-analyses are high-level evidence in medicine.
Clinicians need to understand these study designs despite limited resources.
There is a need for concise guidance on conducting systematic reviews.

Purpose of the Study:

To provide a guide for reading systematic reviews.
To offer a summary for designing and conducting systematic reviews and meta-analyses.

Main Methods:

The article outlines key principles for evaluating systematic reviews.
It summarizes the essential steps in designing and conducting systematic reviews.
Guidance covers meta-analyses and meta-regression analyses.

Main Results:

The article serves as a practical resource for researchers and clinicians.
It addresses the need for accessible information on systematic review methodology.
Understanding these methods enhances the application of evidence-based healthcare.

Conclusions:

Systematic reviews are vital for evidence-based healthcare.
This article aims to bridge the knowledge gap for users and authors.
Effective use of systematic reviews requires understanding their strengths and limitations.