This chapter draws on material published earlier in the BMJ.58 We are grateful to Iain Chalmers for helpful comments on an earlier draft of this chapter.
1 Gelber RD, Goldhirsch A. From the overview to the patient: how to interpret metaanalysis data. Recent Results Cancer Res 1993;127:167-76.
2 Oxman AD, Guyatt GH. A consumer's guide to subgroup analyses. Ann Intern Med 1992;116:78-84.
3 Sacks H, Chalmers TC, Smith H Jr. Randomized versus historical controls for clinical trials. Am J Med 1982;72:233-40.
4 Schulz KF, Chalmers I, Hayes RJ, Altman D. Empirical evidence of bias. Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials. JAMA 1995;273:408-12.
5 Moher D, Pham B, Jones A, et al. Does quality of reports of randomised trials affect estimates of intervention efficacy reported in meta-analyses? Lancet 1998;352:609-13.
6 Prendiville W, Elbourne D, Chalmers I. The effects of routine oxytocic administration in the management of the third stage of labour: an overview of the evidence from controlled trials. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1988;95:3-16.
7 Moher D, Jadad AR, Tugwell P. Assessing the quality of randomized controlled trials. Current issues and future directions. Int J Technol Assess Hlth Care 1996;12:195-208.
8 Begg C, Cho M, Eastwood S, et al. Improving the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials. The CONSORT statement. JAMA 1996;276:637-9.
9 Schulz KF. Randomised trials, human nature, and reporting guidelines. Lancet 1996;348:596-8.
10 Juni P, Witschi A, Bloch R, Egger M. The hazards of scoring the quality of clinical trial for meta-analysis. JAMA 1999;282:1054-60.
11 Smith BJ, Darzins PJ, Quinn M, Heller RF. Modern methods of searching the medical literature. Med J Aust 1992;157:603-11.
12 Dickersin K. Research registers. In: Cooper H, Hedges LV, eds. The handbook of research synthesis. New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1994.
13 Chalmers TC, Celano P, Sacks HS, Smith H. Bias in treatment assignment in controlled clinical trials. N Engl J Med 1983;309:1358-61.
14 Sackett DL, Gent M. Controversy in counting and attributing events in clinical trials. N Engl J Med 1979;301:1410-12.
15 Peduzzi P, Wittes J, Detre K, Holford T. Analysis as-randomized and the problem of non-adherence: an example from the veterans affairs randomized trial of coronary artery bypass surgery. Stat Med 1993;12:1185-95.
16 May GS, Demets DL, Friedman LM, Furberg C, Passamani E. The randomized clinical trial: bias in analysis. Circulation 1981;64:669-73.
17 Moher D, Jadad AR, Nichol G, Penman M, Tugwell P, Walsh S. Assessing the quality of randomized controlled trials: an annotated bibliography of scales and checklists. Controlled Clin Trials 1995;16:62-73.
18 Greenland S. Quality scores are useless and potentially misleading. Am J Epidemiol 1994;140:300-2.
19 Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carrol D, et al. Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary? Controlled Clin Trials 1996;17:1-12.
20 Chalmers TC. Problems induced by meta-analyses. Stat Med 1991;10:971-80.
21 Moher D, Fortin P, Jadad AR, et al. Completeness of reporting of trials published in languages other than English: implications for conduct and reporting of systematic reviews. Lancet 1996;347:363-6.
22 Berlin JA, on behalf of University of Pennsylvania Meta-analysis Blinding Study Group. Does blinding of readers affect the results of meta-analyses? Lancet 1997;350:185-6.
23 Cochrane Reviewer's Handbook (updated July 1999). In: The Cochrane Library (database on disk and CD-ROM). The Cochrane Collaboration. Oxford: Update Software, 1999.
24 Freemantle N, Cleland J, Young P, Mason J, Harrison J. Beta blockade after myocardial infarction: systematic review and meta regression analysis. BMJ 1999;318:1730-7.
25 Sackett DL, Deeks JJ, Altman D. Down with odds ratios! Evidence-Based Med 1996;1:164-7.
26 Deeks J. When can odds ratios mislead? BMJ 1998;317:1155.
27 Laupacis A, Sackett DL, Roberts RS. An assessment of clinically useful measures of the consequences of treatment. N Engl J Med 1988;318:1728-33.
28 G0tzsche PC. Sensitivity of effect variables in rheumatoid arthritis: a meta-analysis of 130 placebo controlled NSAID trials. J Clin Epidemiol 1990;43:1313-18.
29 Galbraith R. A note on graphical presentation of estimated odds ratios from several clinical trials. Stat Med 1988;7:889-94.
30 Bailey K. Inter-study differences: how should they influence the interpretation and analysis of results? Stat Med 1987;6:351-8.
31 Thompson SG. Why sources of heterogeneity in meta-analysis should be investigated. BMJ 1994;309:1351-5.
32 Colditz GA, Brewer TF, Berkley CS, et al. Efficacy of BCG vaccine in the prevention of tuberculosis. JAMA 1994;271:698-702.
33 L'Abbé KA, Detsky AS, O'Rourke K. Meta-analysis in clinical research. Ann Intern Med 1987;107:224-33.
34 Light RJ, Pillemer DB. Summing up. The science of reviewing research. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1984.
35 Van Howe RS. Circumcision and HIV infection: review of the literature and metaanalysis. Int J STD AIDS 1999;10:8-16.
36 O'Farrell N, Egger M. Circumcision in men and the prevalence of HIV infection: a meta-analysis revisited. Int J STD AIDS 2000; 11:137-42.
37 Last JM. A dictionary of epidemiology. New York: Oxford University Press, 1995.
38 Berlin J, Laird NM, Sacks HS, Chalmers TC. A comparison of statistical methods for combining event rates from clinical trials. Stat Med 1989;8:141-51.
39 Yusuf S, Peto R, Lewis J, Collins R, Sleight P. Beta blockade during and after myocardial infarction: an overview of the randomized trials. Prog Cardiovasc Dis 1985;17:335-71.
40 DerSimonian R, Laird N. Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Controlled Clin Trials 1986;7:177-88.
41 Fine PEM. Variation in protection by BCG: implications of and for heterologous immunity. Lancet 1995;346:1339-45.
42 Carlin JB. Meta-analysis for 2 x 2 tables: a Bayesian approach. Stat Med 1992;11:141-58.
43 Bland JM, Altman DG. Bayesians and frequentists. BMJ 1998;317:1151.
44 Spiegelhalter DJ, Myles JP, Jones DR, Abrams KR. An introduction to bayesian methods in health technology assessment. BMJ 1999;319:508-12.
45 Lilford RJ, Braunholtz D. The statistical basis of public policy: a paradigm shift is overdue. BMJ 1996;313:603-7.
46 Su XY, Li Wan Po A. Combining event rates from clinical trials: comparison of bayesian and classical methods. Ann Pharmacother 1996;30:460-5.
47 Thompson SG, Smith TC, Sharp SJ. Investigating underlying risk as a source of heterogeneity in meta-analysis. Stat Med 1997;16:2741-58.
48 Fredman L. Bayesian statistical methods. BMJ 1996;313:569-70.
49 Song F, Abrams KR, Jones DR, Sheldon TA. Systematic reviews of trials and other studies. Health Technol Assess 1998;2(19).
50 Eddy DM, Hasselblad V, Shachter R. Meta-analysis by the confidence profile method. The statistical synthesis of evidence. Boston: Academic Press, 1992.
51 Easterbrook PJ, Berlin J, Gopalan R, Matthews DR. Publication bias in clinical research. Lancet 1991;337:867-72.
52 Anon. A randomized trial of propranolol in patients with acute myocardial infarction. I. Mortality results. JAMA 1982;247:1707-14.
53 Boissel JP, Leizorovicz A, Picolet H, Ducruet T. Efficacy of acebutolol after acute myocardial infarction (the APSI trial). The APSI Investigators. Am J Cardiol 1990;66:24C-31C.
54 Green S, Fleming TR, Emerson S. Effects on overviews of early stopping rules for clinical trials. Stat Med 1987;6:361-7.
55 The Multicenter Postinfarction Research Group. Risk stratification and survival after myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 1983;309:331-6.
56 Altman DG. Confidence intervals for the number needed to treat. BMJ 1998;317:1309-12.
57 Chatellier G, Zapletal E, Lemaitre D, Menard J, Degoulet P. The number needed to treat: a clinically useful nomogram in its proper context. BMJ 1996;312:426-9.
58 Egger M, Davey Smith G, Phillips AN. Meta-analysis: principles and procedures. BMJ 1997;315:1533-7.
Was this article helpful?