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

Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches01:23

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...
Bias in Epidemiological Studies01:29

Bias in Epidemiological Studies

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:
Accuracy and Errors in Hypothesis Testing01:13

Accuracy and Errors in Hypothesis Testing

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% chance...
Ethics in Research01:56

Ethics in Research

Today, scientists agree that good research is ethical in nature and is guided by a basic respect for human dignity and safety. However, this has not always been the case. Modern researchers must demonstrate that the research they perform is ethically sound.
Statistical Significance01:37

Statistical Significance

Once data is collected from both the experimental and the control groups, a statistical analysis is conducted to find out if there are meaningful differences between the two groups. A statistical analysis determines how likely any difference found is due to chance (and thus not meaningful). In psychology, group differences are considered meaningful, or significant, if the odds that these differences occurred by chance alone are 5 percent or less. Stated another way, if we repeated this...
Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors01:15

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...

You might also read

Related Articles

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

Sort by
Same author

Re-Centering Clinical Documentation in the Age of AI Scribes: Four Aims of the Patient Chart Note.

JMIR medical education·2026
Same author

AI Scribes in Health Care: Balancing Transformative Potential With Responsible Integration.

JMIR medical informatics·2025
Same author

Primary Care Informatics: Vitalizing the Bedrock of Health Care.

Journal of medical Internet research·2024
Same author

Corrigendum to: COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy: Umbrella Review of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis.

JMIR public health and surveillance·2024
Same author

Consolidated Reporting Guidelines for Prognostic and Diagnostic Machine Learning Models (CREMLS).

Journal of medical Internet research·2024
Same author

Best Practices for Using AI Tools as an Author, Peer Reviewer, or Editor.

Journal of medical Internet research·2023

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jul 3, 2026

The Adjuvant Efficacy of Angong Niuhuang Pill in the Treatment of Viral Encephalitis: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
08:36

The Adjuvant Efficacy of Angong Niuhuang Pill in the Treatment of Viral Encephalitis: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Published on: April 19, 2024

Value and Credibility of Meta-Analysis: Tutorial on Enhancing Methodological Rigor and AI-Powered Efficiency.

Stefano Brini1, Tiffany I Leung1,2

  • 1JMIR Publications, Toronto, ON, Canada.

Journal of Medical Internet Research
|July 2, 2026
PubMed
Summary

This tutorial enhances meta-analysis rigor by detailing statistical techniques and exploring artificial intelligence (AI) for systematic reviews. It aims to improve the trustworthiness and timeliness of research findings for better clinical and public health decisions.

Keywords:
artificial intelligenceevidence synthesisheterogeneitylarge language modelsliterature reviewmeta-analysissystematic review

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jul 3, 2026

The Adjuvant Efficacy of Angong Niuhuang Pill in the Treatment of Viral Encephalitis: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
08:36

The Adjuvant Efficacy of Angong Niuhuang Pill in the Treatment of Viral Encephalitis: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Published on: April 19, 2024

Area of Science:

  • Biostatistics
  • Medical Informatics
  • Public Health Research

Background:

  • Many systematic reviews and meta-analyses suffer from statistical limitations, hindering clinical practice and public health policy.
  • The time-consuming nature of systematic reviews delays the dissemination of crucial evidence.
  • Improving the quality and efficiency of evidence synthesis is vital for informed decision-making.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To provide essential statistical techniques for conducting robust meta-analyses.
  • To introduce the role of artificial intelligence (AI) in automating systematic literature reviews and meta-analyses.
  • To guide authors in enhancing the rigor and timeliness of their research using new technologies.

Main Methods:

  • A primer on fundamental statistical methods for meta-analysis.
  • A discussion on the application of artificial intelligence (AI) in systematic review processes.
  • Considerations for the ethical use and disclosure of AI in research.

Main Results:

  • Authors can improve the methodological and statistical rigor of their meta-analyses.
  • AI offers potential for automating tasks in systematic reviews, increasing efficiency.
  • Ethical guidelines are crucial for integrating AI into research workflows.

Conclusions:

  • Enhancing statistical expertise and leveraging AI can lead to more reliable and timely meta-analyses.
  • Trustworthy and timely evidence synthesis is essential for advancing clinical practice and public health.
  • Responsible adoption of AI in systematic reviews can accelerate the translation of research into actionable insights.