Linked Life Data

7853051

Source:http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/id/7853051

Statements in which the resource exists as a subject.
PredicateObject
rdf:type
lifeskim:mentions
pubmed:issue
1
pubmed:dateCreated
1995-3-16
pubmed:abstractText
The paper discusses some of the most common criticisms to meta-analysis presented by Professor Feinstein in this Conference. As many of the points raised in his contributions are not new, a critique to them is presented in the context of the type of contribution given by systematic reviews (meta-analysis) to the analysis of the effects of health care interventions. After discussing some terminological issues, the paper challenges Feinsteins' arguments indicating that meta-analysis is inherently faulted on four grounds: (a) reproducibility, (b) precision, (c) suitable extrapolation, (d) fair comparison. Each point is discussed providing examples drawn from the published literature with a view to indicate that--despite their current limitations--systematic reviews are a necessary step to synthesize information, orient clinical research and help produce practice guidelines.
pubmed:commentsCorrections
pubmed:language
eng
pubmed:journal
pubmed:citationSubset
IM
pubmed:status
MEDLINE
pubmed:month
Jan
pubmed:issn
0895-4356
pubmed:author
pubmed:issnType
Print
pubmed:volume
48
pubmed:owner
NLM
pubmed:authorsComplete
Y
pubmed:pagination
81-6
pubmed:dateRevised
2007-11-15
pubmed:meshHeading
pubmed:year
1995
pubmed:articleTitle
"Meta-analysis: statistical alchemy for the 21st century": discussion. A plea for a more balanced view of meta-analysis and systematic overviews of the effect of health care interventions.
pubmed:affiliation
Italian Cochrane Center, Istituto Mario Negri, Milano.
pubmed:publicationType
Journal Article, Comment