Abstract
In previous articles we have focused on the potentials, principles, and pitfalls of meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.1 2 3 4 5 Meta-analysis of observational data is, however, also becoming common. In a Medline search we identified 566 articles (excluding those published as letters) published in 1995 and indexed with the medical subject heading (MeSH) term “meta-analysis.” We randomly selected 100 of these articles and examined them further. Sixty articles reported on actual meta-analyses, and 40 were methodological papers, editorials, and traditional reviews (1). Among the meta-analyses, about half were based on observational studies, mainly cohort and case-control studies of medical interventions or aetiological associations. View this table: Characteristics of 100 articles randomly selected from articles published in 1995 and indexed in Medline with keyword “meta-analysis” The randomised controlled trial is the principal research design in the evaluation of medical interventions. However, aetiological hypotheses—for example, those relating common exposures to the occurrence of disease—cannot generally be tested in randomised experiments. Does breathing other people's tobacco smoke cause lung cancer, drinking coffee cause coronary heart disease, and eating a diet rich in saturated fat cause breast cancer? Studies of such “menaces of daily life”6 use observational designs or examine the presumed biological mechanisms in the laboratory. In these situations the risks involved are generally small, but once a large proportion of the population is exposed, the potential public health implications of these associations—if they are causal—can be striking. Analyses of observational data also have a role in medical effectiveness research.7 The evidence available from clinical trials will rarely answer all the important questions. Most trials are conducted to establish efficacy and safety of a single agent in a specific clinical situation. Owing to the limited size of such trials, less common adverse effects of drugs may only be detected in case-control …
Keywords
Affiliated Institutions
Related Publications
Corticosteroids as Adjunctive Therapy in the Treatment of Influenza: An Updated Cochrane Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Objectives: Corticosteroids may be beneficial in sepsis, but uncertainty remains over their effects in severe influenza. This systematic review updates the current evidence rega...
Any casualties in the clash of randomised and observational evidence?
Randomised controlled trials and observational studies are often seen as mutually exclusive, if not opposing, methods of clinical research. Two recent reports, however, identifi...
Statistical Problems in the Reporting of Clinical Trials
Reports of clinical trials often contain a wealth of data comparing treatments. This can lead to problems in interpretation, particularly when significance testing is used exten...
CONSORT 2010 Statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials
The CONSORT statement is used worldwide to improve the reporting of randomised controlled trials. Kenneth Schulz and colleagues describe the latest version, CONSORT 2010, which ...
Unpublished rating scales: A major source of bias in randomised controlled trials of treatments for schizophrenia
Background A recent review suggested an association between using unpublished scales in clinical trials and finding significant results. Aims To determine whether such an associ...
Publication Info
- Year
- 1998
- Type
- review
- Volume
- 316
- Issue
- 7125
- Pages
- 140-144
- Citations
- 978
- Access
- Closed
External Links
Social Impact
Social media, news, blog, policy document mentions
Citation Metrics
Cite This
Identifiers
- DOI
- 10.1136/bmj.316.7125.140