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

Search research articles

Related Experiment Videos

Systematic literature review and meta-analysis

¹Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.

Seminars in Reproductive Endocrinology

|May 1, 1996

Summary

Systematic reviews and meta-analysis minimize bias by using a predefined protocol and combining data. This approach, especially with randomized clinical trials, yields the most accurate treatment effect estimates.

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

Neurotrophins (BDNF and NGF) in follicular fluid of women with different infertility diagnoses.

Reproductive biomedicine online·2011

Same author

Cochrane reviews in perspective: the importance of appropriate conclusions and timing of publication.

Human reproduction (Oxford, England)·2011

Same author

Clinical outcomes in relation to the daily dose of recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone for ovarian stimulation in in vitro fertilization in presumed normal responders younger than 39 years: a meta-analysis.

Human reproduction update·2010

Same author

A meta-analysis of pregnancy outcomes in women with polycystic ovary syndrome.

Human reproduction update·2006

Same author

A meta-analysis of outcomes of conventional IVF in women with polycystic ovary syndrome.

Human reproduction update·2005

Same author

A multicentre randomized controlled trial of expectant management versus IVF in women with Fallopian tube patency.

Human reproduction (Oxford, England)·2004

Area of Science:

Medical research methodology
Evidence-based medicine

Background:

Systematic error or bias can compromise review validity without clear research questions and methodology.
Systematic review and meta-analysis methods aim to mitigate bias for precise effect estimation.

Purpose of the Study:

To outline the principles and methods of systematic review and meta-analysis.
To highlight the importance of a priori protocols in minimizing bias.
To discuss the suitability of randomized clinical trials for meta-analysis.

Main Methods:

Establishing a priori protocols detailing research questions and inclusion criteria.
Quantitatively combining data from selected studies.
Utilizing randomized clinical trials for robust effect estimation.

Main Results:

Systematic reviews and meta-analysis provide valid and precise estimates of effect or risk.
A priori defined protocols are crucial for reducing bias.
Randomized clinical trials are preferred for meta-analysis due to lower bias.

Conclusions:

Systematic review and meta-analysis are essential tools for rigorous scientific evaluation.
Adherence to protocols and appropriate study selection enhances the reliability of findings.
The Cochrane Collaboration's structure supports these systematic approaches.

Related Experiment Videos