-
Int J Evid Based Healthc · Sep 2015
Fixed or random effects meta-analysis? Common methodological issues in systematic reviews of effectiveness.
- Catalin Tufanaru, Zachary Munn, Matthew Stephenson, and Edoardo Aromataris.
- The Joanna Briggs Institute, Faculty of Health Sciences, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, 115 Grenfell Street, South Australia 5000, Australia.
- Int J Evid Based Healthc. 2015 Sep 1; 13 (3): 196-207.
AbstractSystematic review aims to systematically identify, critically appraise, and summarize all relevant studies that match predefined criteria and answer predefined questions. The most common type of systematic review is that assessing the effectiveness of an intervention or therapy. In this article, we discuss some of the common methodological issues that arise when conducting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of effectiveness data, including issues related to study designs, meta-analysis, and the use and interpretation of effect sizes.
Notes
Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
- Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as
*italics*,_underline_or**bold**. - Superscript can be denoted by
<sup>text</sup>and subscript<sub>text</sub>. - Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines
1. 2. 3., hyphens-or asterisks*. - Links can be included with:
[my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com) - Images can be included with:
 - For footnotes use
[^1](This is a footnote.)inline. - Or use an inline reference
[^1]to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document[^1]: This is a long footnote..