ArticleClinical and translational gastroenterology2017
How to Conduct and Interpret Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses.
Article in Clinical and translational gastroenterology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 10 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
20 citing papers in PubMed, 10 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Fatigue self-management led by occupational therapists and/or physiotherapists for chronic conditions: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Chronic illness · 2022Pooled it
- Behavioral interventions to extend sleep duration: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Sleep medicine reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Prevalence of vancomycin-resistant enterococcus in Africa in one health approach: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Scientific reports · 2020Pooled it
- Community-level interventions for improving access to food in low- and middle-income countries.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020Pooled it
- Community-level interventions for improving access to food in low- and middle-income countries.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Infectious and parasitic diseases of poultry in Ethiopia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Poultry science · 2019Pooled it
- Childhood Trauma and Neurocognition in Adults With Psychotic Disorders: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Schizophrenia bulletin · 2019Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Review
- Review
- Kinetic Modeling ofMetabolites · 2022Review
- Systematic Review With Meta-analysis: Safety and Effectiveness of Combining Biologics and Small Molecules in Inflammatory Bowel Disease.Crohn's & colitis 360 · 2022Article
- How to Write a Systematic Review: A Narrative Review.International journal of preventive medicine · 2021Review
- Positioning Therapies in the Management of Crohn's Disease.Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association · 2020Review
- Institutional insights on integrating social and environmental science for solutions-driven research.Environmental science & policy · 2019Article
- Effect of maternal mental health improvement programs on obesity in pediatric populations: a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.Systematic reviews · 2018Article
- How clean is clean: a review of the social science of environmental cleanups.Environmental research letters : ERL [Web site] · 2018Article
- Response Letter to the Editor in Reference to Letter to the Editor about "Does Overall Catastrophic Health Care Expenditure Make Sense"?Iranian journal of public health · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
Systematic reviews with or without meta-analyses serve a key purpose in critically and objectively synthesizing all available evidence regarding a focused clinical question and can inform clinical practice and clinical guidelines. Performing a rigorous systematic review is multi-step process, which includes (a) identifying a well-defined focused clinically relevant question, (b) developing a detailed review protocol with strict inclusion and exclusion criteria, (c) systematic literature search of multiple databases and unpublished data, in consultation with a medical librarian, (d) meticulous study identification and (e) systematic data abstraction, by at least two sets of investigators independently, (f) risk of bias assessment, and (g) thoughtful quantitative synthesis through meta-analysis where relevant. Besides informing guidelines, credible systematic reviews and quality of evidence assessment can help identify key knowledge gaps for future studies.
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.