Systematic reviews are one of the major building blocks of evidence-based medicine. This overview is an introduction to conducting systematic reviews and meta-analyses.
Conclusions:
Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) represent the most robust form of design in the hierarchy of research evidence. In addition, primary data do not have to be collected by the researcher him/herself, and there is no need for approval from an ethics committee. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses are not as daunting as they may appear to be, provided the scope is sufficiently narrow and an appropriate supervisor available.
MoherDLiberatiATetzlaffJ. The PRISMA Group. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement. PLoS Med2009; 6(7): e1000097. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097
3.
StroupDFBerlinJAMortonSC. Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: A proposal for reporting. J Am Med Ass2000; 283: 2008–2012.
4.
KiselySHallKSiskindD. Deep Brain Stimulation for obsessive-compulsive disorder – A systematic review and meta-analysis. Psychol Med2014; 44: 3533–3542.
5.
HigginsJPTGreenS. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions, Version 5.1.0. Oxford: The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011.
Review Manager (RevMan) [Computer program]. Version 5.3. Copenhagen: The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration. http://tech.cochrane.org/revman/about-revman-5 (2014, accessed 21 November 2014).
9.
AbramsonJH. WINPEPI updated: Computer programs for epidemiologists and their teaching potential. Epidemiol Perspect Innovations2011; 8: 1.
