• Adrian V Hernandez, Katherine M Marti, and Yuani M Roman.
• Health Outcomes, Policy, and Evidence Synthesis Group, University of Connecticut School of Pharmacy, Storrs, CT; Unit of Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses, Vicerrectorado de Investigacion, Universidad San Ignacio de Loyola, Lima, Peru. Electronic address: adrian.hernandez-diaz@uconn.edu.
• Chest. 2020 Jul 1; 158 (1S): S97-S102.

AbstractWhen a review is performed following predefined steps (ie, systematically) and its results are quantitatively analyzed, it is called meta-analysis. Publication of meta-analyses has increased exponentially in pubmed.gov; using the key word "meta-analysis," 1,473 titles were yielded in 2007 and 176,704 on January 2020. Well-designed and reported meta-analyses provide valuable information for clinicians, researchers, and policymakers. The aim of this study was to provide CHEST peer reviewers, as well as authors and researchers in training, with tools that can help to improve the quality and timeliness of journal reviews, as well as the quality of the meta-analyses submitted. This article also is intended to be a practical guide to inform authors about the key features of meta-analyses to be considered when producing their review.Copyright © 2020 American College of Chest Physicians. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

8 keywords...

hide…