ArticleNursing outlook
Using meta-analyses for comparative effectiveness research.
Article in Nursing outlook. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Aerobic vaginitis is associated with carbonic anhydrase IX in cervical intraepithelial neoplasia.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Comprehensive Gene Expression Profiling Analysis of Adipose Tissue in Male Individuals from Fat- and Thin-Tailed Sheep Breeds.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2023Article
- Comparing Meta-Analyses with ChatGPT in the Evaluation of the Effectiveness and Tolerance of Systemic Therapies in Moderate-to-Severe Plaque Psoriasis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Article
- Stiffness and Instability After MPFL Reconstruction Using a Fluoroscopic Versus Open Technique to Localize the Femoral Attachment Site: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine · 2023Review
- Comparative effectiveness of mycophenolate mofetil versus cyclophosphamide in systemic sclerosis-related interstitial lung disease.Clinical rheumatology · 2021Article
- Comparative effectiveness of glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes treated with GLP-1 receptor agonists: a network meta-analysis of placebo-controlled and active-comparator trials.Diabetes, metabolic syndrome and obesity : targets and therapy · 2017Article
- Association of the TP53 codon 72 polymorphism and breast cancer risk: a meta-analysis.SpringerPlus · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Comparative effectiveness research seeks to identify the most effective interventions for particular patient populations. Meta-analysis is an especially valuable form of comparative effectiveness research because it emphasizes the magnitude of intervention effects rather than relying on tests of statistical significance among primary studies. Overall effects can be calculated for diverse clinical and patient-centered variables to determine the outcome patterns. Moderator analyses compare intervention characteristics among primary studies by determining whether effect sizes vary among studies with different intervention characteristics. Intervention effectiveness can be linked to patient characteristics to provide evidence for patient-centered care. Moderator analyses often answer questions never posed by primary studies because neither multiple intervention characteristics nor populations are compared in single primary studies. Thus, meta-analyses provide unique contributions to knowledge. Although meta-analysis is a powerful comparative effectiveness strategy, methodological challenges and limitations in primary research must be acknowledged to interpret findings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.