ArticleIndian journal of anaesthesia2025
Systematic review meta-analysis protocol preparation and registration - A narrative review.
Article in Indian journal of anaesthesia, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Translating pooled estimates into clinical practice: A traffic-light framework for interpreting meta-analyses in diverse clinical settings.Indian journal of anaesthesia · 2026Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Systematic reviews and meta-analyses (SRMAs) help in decision making, especially on conflicting publication findings and quality. SRMA identifies the source of heterogeneity, reduces subjectivity and identifies and fills gaps in existing knowledge. However, conducting an SRMA requires a well-written protocol, which acts as a clear roadmap for the researcher and defines objectives, methods and expected outcomes. Predefined research questions and methods minimise bias, thus increasing the reliability of the results. The protocol ensures that the study team stays consistent in data collection, synthesis and interpretation. The SRMA protocol includes rationale, hypothesis, aims and methodology. A detailed protocol improves the overall quality of the research. All SRMA protocols must be registered and made available publicly. Protocol registration ensures transparency in the research process, which avoids the wastage of resources and prevents duplication. A well-planned protocol facilitates faster peer review and enhances the chances for publication. This narrative review primarily focuses on SRMA protocol preparation and its registration.
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.