Affiliation:
1. Universidade Estadual Paulista, Brasil; McMaster University, Canada
Abstract
Abstract There is an enormous and ever-growing quantity of healthcare information available and practitioners must transform it into knowledge to be able to use it in their clinical practice. Even readers who do not conduct scientific studies themselves need to understand the scientific method in detail to be able to critically evaluate scientific articles. Evidence-based healthcare (EBH) can be defined as the link between good scientific research and clinical practice and systematic reviews constitute one of the forms of research excellence proposed within EBH. Systematic reviews employ rigorous methods that reduce the occurrence of bias. Systematic reviews with meta-analyses generally optimize the results found, because quantitative analysis of the studies included in the review yields additional information. In this paper, we will discuss how to interpret a meta-analysis and how to apply subset and sensitivity analysis strategies and we will also describe possible sources of heterogeneity and common errors that can affect a meta-analysis.
Subject
Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
Reference7 articles.
1. Evidence-based medicine: a new approach to teaching the practice of medicine;Guyatt G;JAMA,1992
2. Fonoaudiologia baseada em evidências e o Centro Cochrane do Brasil;El Dib RP;Diagn. Tratamento.,2006
3. Como praticar a medicina baseada em evidências;El Dib RP;J Vasc Bras,2007
4. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions version 6.3 (updated February 2022).;Higgins JPT,2022
5. Electronic nicotine delivery systems and/or electronic non-nicotine delivery systems for tobacco smoking cessation or reduction: a systematic review and meta-analysis;El Dib R;BMJ Open,2017
Cited by
3 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献