Switch to
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| lifeskim:mentions | |
| pubmed:issue |
10
|
| pubmed:dateCreated |
1989-11-30
|
| pubmed:abstractText |
In this article, we counter some criticism regarding the desirability of performing meta-analysis in clinical research. These criticisms, we argue, are based mainly on current difficulties in deriving firm conclusions based on meta-analysis, resulting from poor methodology and reporting of primary studies. This is not a fault of meta-analysis. In fact, with a better understanding of meta-analysis in the context of the full scientific research process, meta-analysis is seen as a key element for improving individual research efforts and their reporting in the literature. This in turn will further enhance the role of meta-analysis in helping clinicians and policy makers answer clinical questions.
|
| pubmed:language |
eng
|
| pubmed:journal | |
| pubmed:citationSubset |
IM
|
| pubmed:status |
MEDLINE
|
| pubmed:issn |
0895-4356
|
| pubmed:author | |
| pubmed:issnType |
Print
|
| pubmed:volume |
42
|
| pubmed:owner |
NLM
|
| pubmed:authorsComplete |
Y
|
| pubmed:pagination |
1021-4
|
| pubmed:dateRevised |
2007-11-15
|
| pubmed:meshHeading | |
| pubmed:year |
1989
|
| pubmed:articleTitle |
Meta-analysis in medical research: strong encouragement for higher quality in individual research efforts.
|
| pubmed:affiliation |
Clinical Epidemiology Unit, Toronto Hospital, Ontario, Canada.
|
| pubmed:publicationType |
Journal Article,
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
|