Some common, fatal flaws in systematic reviews of observational studies
Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved..
When evidence from randomized controlled trials about the effectiveness and safety of an intervention is unclear, researchers may choose to review the nonrandomized evidence. All systematic reviews pose considerable challenges, and the level of methodological expertise required to undertake a useful review of nonrandomized intervention studies is both high and often severely underestimated. Using the example of the endometrial receptivity array, we review some common, critical flaws in systematic reviews of this nature, including errors in critical appraisal and meta-analysis.
| Medienart: |
E-Artikel |
|---|
| Erscheinungsjahr: |
2024 |
|---|---|
| Erschienen: |
2024 |
| Enthalten in: |
Zur Gesamtaufnahme - year:2024 |
|---|---|
| Enthalten in: |
Fertility and sterility - (2024) vom: 01. Feb. |
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
|---|
| Beteiligte Personen: |
Wilkinson, Jack [VerfasserIn] |
|---|
| Links: |
|---|
| Themen: |
Critical appraisal |
|---|
| Anmerkungen: |
Date Revised 04.04.2024 published: Print-Electronic Citation Status Publisher |
|---|
| doi: |
10.1016/j.fertnstert.2024.01.034 |
|---|
| funding: |
|
|---|---|
| Förderinstitution / Projekttitel: |
|
| PPN (Katalog-ID): |
NLM367989964 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | NLM367989964 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20240404234726.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 240204s2024 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2024.01.034 |2 doi | |
| 028 | 5 | 2 | |a pubmed24n1364.xml |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)NLM367989964 | ||
| 035 | |a (NLM)38309515 | ||
| 035 | |a (PII)S0015-0282(24)00074-8 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Wilkinson, Jack |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Some common, fatal flaws in systematic reviews of observational studies |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2024 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a ƒaComputermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a ƒa Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 500 | |a Date Revised 04.04.2024 | ||
| 500 | |a published: Print-Electronic | ||
| 500 | |a Citation Status Publisher | ||
| 520 | |a Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. | ||
| 520 | |a When evidence from randomized controlled trials about the effectiveness and safety of an intervention is unclear, researchers may choose to review the nonrandomized evidence. All systematic reviews pose considerable challenges, and the level of methodological expertise required to undertake a useful review of nonrandomized intervention studies is both high and often severely underestimated. Using the example of the endometrial receptivity array, we review some common, critical flaws in systematic reviews of this nature, including errors in critical appraisal and meta-analysis | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Journal Article | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Review | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Systematic reviews | |
| 650 | 4 | |a critical appraisal | |
| 650 | 4 | |a meta-analysis | |
| 650 | 4 | |a nonrandomized studies of interventions | |
| 650 | 4 | |a observational studies | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Stocking, Katie |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Fertility and sterility |d 1950 |g (2024) vom: 01. Feb. |w (DE-627)NLM000040614 |x 1556-5653 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g year:2024 |g day:01 |g month:02 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2024.01.034 |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_NLM | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |j 2024 |b 01 |c 02 | ||