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 Concept Videos

Regression Toward the Mean01:52

Regression Toward the Mean

6.3K
Regression toward the mean (“RTM”) is a phenomenon in which extremely high or low values—for example, and individual’s blood pressure at a particular moment—appear closer to a group’s average upon remeasuring. Although this statistical peculiarity is the result of random error and chance, it has been problematic across various medical, scientific, financial and psychological applications. In particular, RTM, if not taken into account, can interfere when...
6.3K
Bias in Epidemiological Studies01:29

Bias in Epidemiological Studies

1.7K
Biases can arise at various stages of research, from study design and data collection to analysis and interpretation. Recognizing and addressing these biases is essential to ensure the validity and reliability of epidemiological findings.Broadly speaking, biases in epidemiology fall into three main categories: selection bias, information bias, and confounding. A more detailed description of possible biases is:  
1.7K
Accuracy and Errors in Hypothesis Testing01:13

Accuracy and Errors in Hypothesis Testing

716
Hypothesis testing is a fundamental statistical tool that begins with the assumption that the null hypothesis H0 is true. During this process, two types of errors can occur: Type I and Type II. A Type I error refers to the incorrect rejection of a true null hypothesis, while a Type II error involves the failure to reject a false null hypothesis.
In hypothesis testing, the probability of making a Type I error, denoted as α, is commonly set at 0.05. This significance level indicates a 5%...
716
Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors01:15

Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors

8.7K
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...
8.7K
Statistical Analysis: Overview01:11

Statistical Analysis: Overview

14.6K
When we take repeated measurements on the same or replicated samples, we will observe inconsistencies in the magnitude. These inconsistencies are called errors. To categorize and characterize these results and their errors, the researcher can use statistical analysis to determine the quality of the measurements and/or suitability of the methods.
One of the most commonly used statistical quantifiers is the mean, which is the ratio between the sum of the numerical values of all results and the...
14.6K
Hindsight Biases01:12

Hindsight Biases

3.5K
Hindsight bias leads you to believe that the event you just experienced was predictable, even though it really wasn’t. In other words, you knew all along that things would turn out the way they did. Can you relate this to the phrase "Hindsight is 20/20" now? 
3.5K

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

Novel therapies and interventions in sepsis and septic shock.

BJA education·2025
Same author

Clinical results in patients affected by moderate-severe knee osteoarthritis and treated with micro-fragmented adipose tissue: the therapeutic effects on symptomatology.

Musculoskeletal surgery·2024
Same author

The IlluminOss® System: a solution in elderly patients with upper limbs bone metastases.

European review for medical and pharmacological sciences·2022
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
Same journal

List of guest reviewers.

Heart, lung and vessels·2018
Same journal

Resting energy expenditures in haemodynamically compromised cardiac patients.

Heart, lung and vessels·2016
Same journal

Surgical therapy for complications of pneumonia on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation can improve the ability to wean patients from support.

Heart, lung and vessels·2016
Same journal

Hypothermic lung edema after accidental hypothermia with out of hospital cardiac arrest.

Heart, lung and vessels·2016
Same journal

Improved detection of an intravascular catheter using dual energy subtraction radiography.

Heart, lung and vessels·2016
Same journal

Pitfalls in percutaneous ECMO cannulation.

Heart, lung and vessels·2016
See all related articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: May 4, 2026

Author Spotlight: Evaluating the Adjuvant Efficacy and Safety of Angong Niuhuang Pill in Viral Encephalitis Treatment
08:36

Author Spotlight: Evaluating the Adjuvant Efficacy and Safety of Angong Niuhuang Pill in Viral Encephalitis Treatment

Published on: April 19, 2024

1.4K

Meta-analysis: pitfalls and hints.

T Greco1, A Zangrillo2, G Biondi-Zoccai3

  • 1Department of Anesthesia and Intensive Care, San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy ; Section of Medical Statistics and Biometry Giulio A. Maccacaro, Department of Occupational and Environmental Health, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.

Heart, Lung and Vessels
|December 24, 2013
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

This work highlights common pitfalls in meta-analysis research to help clinicians evaluate findings. Following key steps minimizes bias and ensures reliable results from this powerful data synthesis tool.

Keywords:
difficultieslimitsmeta-analysisrecommendationssystematic review

More Related Videos

Meta-analysis of Voxel-Based Neuroimaging Studies using Seed-based d Mapping with Permutation of Subject Images SDM-PSI
06:26

Meta-analysis of Voxel-Based Neuroimaging Studies using Seed-based d Mapping with Permutation of Subject Images SDM-PSI

Published on: November 27, 2019

82.5K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: May 4, 2026

Author Spotlight: Evaluating the Adjuvant Efficacy and Safety of Angong Niuhuang Pill in Viral Encephalitis Treatment
08:36

Author Spotlight: Evaluating the Adjuvant Efficacy and Safety of Angong Niuhuang Pill in Viral Encephalitis Treatment

Published on: April 19, 2024

1.4K
Meta-analysis of Voxel-Based Neuroimaging Studies using Seed-based d Mapping with Permutation of Subject Images SDM-PSI
06:26

Meta-analysis of Voxel-Based Neuroimaging Studies using Seed-based d Mapping with Permutation of Subject Images SDM-PSI

Published on: November 27, 2019

82.5K

Area of Science:

  • Medical Research Methodology
  • Biostatistics
  • Evidence-Based Medicine

Background:

  • Meta-analysis is a valuable tool for synthesizing research and determining treatment effects.
  • However, meta-analysis is susceptible to biases and errors that can lead to misleading conclusions.
  • Ensuring the reliability of meta-analysis findings is crucial for clinical decision-making.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To provide an overview of common pitfalls encountered during meta-analysis.
  • To guide researchers in conducting rigorous meta-analyses and clinicians in evaluating their results.
  • To enhance the overall quality and interpretability of published meta-analytic studies.

Main Methods:

  • Exploration of critical steps in meta-analysis, from protocol development to interpretation.
  • Identification of potential sources of bias and personal judgment influencing outcomes.
  • Discussion of checks and balances to assess the reliability of meta-analysis conclusions.

Main Results:

  • Meta-analysis requires careful planning and execution to avoid significant errors.
  • Personal judgment and biases can inadvertently affect the results of a meta-analysis.
  • Adherence to established guidelines and critical evaluation are essential for valid findings.

Conclusions:

  • Minimizing risks in meta-analysis involves meticulous attention to detail throughout the process.
  • Researchers must be aware of potential biases to conduct robust meta-analyses.
  • Clinicians should critically appraise meta-analysis studies using established reliability checks.