Try the new Google Books
Check out the new look and enjoy easier access to your favorite features
Page 2
1. Guyatt GH, Sackett DL, Sinclair JC, Hayward R, Cook DJ, Cook RJ. User's guide to the medical literature. IX. A method for grading health care recommendations. Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. JAMA. 1995;274:1800–1804. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
2. Sackett DL, Rosenberg WM, Gray JA, Haynes RB, Richardson WS. Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn't. BMJ. 1996;312:71–72. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
3. Chalmers TC, Matta RJ, Smith H, Jr, Kunzler AM. Evidence favoring the use of anticoagulants in the hospital phase of acute myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med. 1977;297:1091–1096. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
4. Patsopoulos NA, Analatos AA, Ioannidis JP. Relative citation impact of various study designs in the health sciences. JAMA. 2005;293:2362–2366. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
5. Hennekens CH, DeMets D, Bairey-Merz CN, Borzak S, Borer J. Doing more good than harm: the need for a cease fire. Am J Med. 2009;122:315–316. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
6. Naylor CD. Meta-analysis and the meta-epidemiology of clinical research. BMJ. 1997;315:617–619. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
7. Bailar JC. The promise and problems of meta-analysis [editorial] N Engl J Med. 1997;337:559–561. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
8. Meta-analysis under scrutiny [editorial] Lancet. 1997;350:675. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
9. Glass GV. Primary, secondary and meta-analysis of research. Educational Researcher. 1976;5:3–8. [Google Scholar]
10. Higgins JPT, Green S, editors. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.0.2 [updated September 2009] The Cochrane Collaboration; 2009. Available from www.cochrane-handbook.org. [Google Scholar]
11. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, PRISMA Group Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. J Clin Epidemiol. 2009;62:1006–1012. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
12. Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, Mulrow C, Götzsche PC, Ioannidis JP, et al. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. J Clin Epidemiol. 2009;62:e1–34. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
13. Moher D, Cook DJ, Eastwood S, Olkin I, Rennie D, Stroup DF. Improving the quality of reports of metaanalyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement. Quality of Reporting of Meta-analyses. Lancet. 1999;354:1896–1900. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
14. Antman EM, Lau J, Kupelnick B, Mosteller F, Chalmers TC. A comparison of results of meta-analyses of randomized control trials and recommendations of clinical experts: Treatments for myocardial infarction. JAMA. 1992;268:240–248. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
15. Oxman AD, Guyatt GH. The science of reviewing research. Ann NY Acad Sci. 1993;703:125–133. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
16. Lau J, Ioannidis JP, Schmid CH. Quantitative synthesis in systematic reviews. Ann Intern Med. 1997;127:820–826. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
17. Greenland S. Invited commentary: A critical look at some popular meta-analytic methods. Am J Epidemiol. 1994;140:290–296. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
18. Ioannidis JPA, Haidich A-B, Pappa M, Pantazis N, Kokori SI, Tektonidou MG, et al. Comparison of evidence of treatment effects in randomized and non-randomized studies. JAMA. 2001;286:821–830. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
19. Simmonds MC, Higgins JPT, Stewart LA, Tierney JA, Clarke MJ, Thompson SG. Meta-analysis of individual patient data from randomized trials: A review of methods used in practice. Clin Trials. 2005;2:209–217. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
20. Stewart LA, Clarke MJ. Practical methodology of meta-analyses (overviews) using updated individual patient data. Cochrane working group. Stat Med. 1995;14:2057–2079. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
21. Altman DG. Systematic reviews of evaluations of prognostic variables. BMJ. 2001;323:224–228. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
22. Simon R, Altman DG: Statistical aspects of prognostic factor studies in oncology. Br J Cancer. 1994;69:979–985. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
23. Ioannidis JPA, Vlachoyiannopoulos PG, Haidich AB, Medsger TA, Jr, Lucas M, Michet CJ, et al. Mortality in systemic sclerosis: an international meta-analysis of individual patient data. Am J Med. 2005;118:2–10. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
24. Oxman AD, Clarke MJ, Stewart LA. From science to practice. Meta-analyses using individual patient data are needed. JAMA. 1995;274:845–846. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
25. Stewart LA, Tierney JF. To IPD or not to IPD? Advantages and disadvantages of systematic reviews using individual patient data. Eval Health Prof. 2002;25:76–97. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
26. Trikalinos TA, Ioannidis JPA. Predictive modeling and heterogeneity of baseline risk in meta-analysis of individual patient data. J Clin Epidemiol. 2001;54:245–252. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
27. Pildal J, Hróbjartsson A, Jorgensen KJ, Hilden J, Altman DG, Götzsche PC. Impact of allocation concealment on conclusions drawn from meta-analyses of randomized trials. Int J Epidemiol. 2007;36:847–857. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
28. Juni P, Altman DG, Egger M. Systematic reviews in health care: Assessing the quality of controlled clinical trials. BMJ. 2001;323:42–46. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
29. Chan AW, Hróbjartsson A, Haahr MT, Götzsche PC, Altman DG. Empirical evidence for selective reporting of outcomes in randomized trials: comparison of protocols to published articles. JAMA. 2004;291:2457–2465. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
30. Dwan K, Altman DG, Arnaiz JA, Bloom J, Chan A, Cronin E, et al. Systematic review of the empirical evidence of study publication bias and outcome reporting bias. PLoS One. 2008;3:e3081. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
31. Egger M, Smith GD, Phillips AN. Meta-analysis: principles and procedures. BMJ. 1997;315:1533–1537. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
32. Stangl DK, Berry DA. Meta-analysis in medicine and health policy. New York, NY: 2000. [Google Scholar]
33. Mantel N, Haenszel W. Statistical aspects of the analysis of data from retrospective studies of disease. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1959;22:719–748. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
34. Yusuf S, Peto R, Lewis J, Collins R, Sleight P. Beta blockade during and after myocardial infarction: an overview of the randomized trials. Prog Cardiovasc Dis. 1985;27:335–371. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
35. DerSimonian R, Laird N. Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials. 1986;7:177–188. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
36. Whitehead A. Meta-analysis of controlled clinical trials. Chichester, UK: JohnWiley & Sons Ltd; 2002. [Google Scholar]
37. Greenland S. Quantitative methods in the review of epidemiologic literature. Epidemiol Rev. 1987;9:1–30. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
38. Cochran W. The combination of estimates from different experiments. Biometrics. 1954;10:101–129. [Google Scholar]
39. Hardy RJ, Thompson SG. Detecting and describing heterogeneity in meta-analysis. Stat Med. 1998;17:841–856. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
40. Higgins JP, Thompsom SG, Deeks JJ, Altman DG. Measuring inconsistency in meta-analysis. BMJ. 2003;327:557–560. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
41. Higgins JP, Thompson SG. Quantifying heterogeneity in a metaanalysis. Stat Med. 2002;21:1539–1558. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
42. Huedo-Medina TB, Sanchez-Meca J, Marin-Martinez F, Botella J. Assessing heterogeneity in meta-analysis: Q statistic or I2 index? Psychol Methods. 2006;11:193–206. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
43. Petiti DB. Meta-analysis, decision analysis and cost-effectiveness analysis. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 1994. [Google Scholar]
44. Lau J, Ioannidis JP, Schmid CH. Quantitative synthesis in systematic reviews. Ann Intern Med. 1997;127:820–826. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
45. Baker R, Jackson D. A new approach to outliers in meta-analysis. Health Care Manage Sci. 2008;11:121–131. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
46. Lau J, Schmid CH, Chalmers TC. Cumulative meta-analysis of clinical trials builds evidence for exemplary medical care. J Clin Epidemiol. 1995;48:45–57. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
47. Ioannidis JP, Lau J. State of the evidence: current status and prospects of meta-analysis in infectious diseases. Clin Infect Dis. 1999;29:1178–1185. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
48. Dickersin K, Berlin JA. Meta-analysis: State of the science. Epidemiol Rev. 1992;14:154–176. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
49. Light J, Pillemer DB. Summing up: The Science of Reviewing Research. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press; 1984. [Google Scholar]
50. Egger M, Smith GD, Schneider M, Minder C. Bias in metaanalysis detected by a simple, graphical test. BMJ. 1997;315:629–624. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
51. Sterne JA, Egger M. Funnel plots for detecting bias in metaanalysis: guidelines on choice of axis. J Clin Epidemiol. 2001;54:1046–1045. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
52. Begg CB, Mazumdar M. Operating characteristics of a rank correlation test for publication bias. Biometrics. 1994;50:1088–1101. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
53. Lau J, Ioannidis JP, Terrin N, Schmid CH, Olkin I. The case of the misleading funnel plot. BMJ. 2006;333:597–590. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
54. Tang JL, Liu JL. Misleading funnel plot for detection of bias in meta-analysis. J Clin Epidemiol. 2000;53:477–484. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
55. Ioannidis JP. Effect of the statistical significance of results on the time to completion and publication of randomized efficacy trials. JAMA. 1998;279:281–286. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
56. Haidich AB, Ioannidis JP. Effect of early patient enrollment on the time to completion and publication of randomized controlled trials. Am J Epidemiol. 2001;154:873–880. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
57. Haidich AB, Charis B, Dardavessis T, Tirodimos I, Arvanitidou M. The quality of safety reporting in trials is still suboptimal: Survey of major general medical journals. J Clin Epidemiol. 2010 in press. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
58. Egger M, Zellweger-Zähner T, Schneider M, Junker C, Lengeler C, Antes G. Language bias in randomised controlled trials published in English and German. Lancet. 1997;350:326–329. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
59. Jóni P, Holenstein F, Sterne J, Bartlett C, Egger M. Direction and impact of language bias in meta-analyses of controlled trials: empirical study. Int J Epidemiol. 2002;31:115–123. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
60. Lumley T. Network meta-analysis for indirect treatment comparisons. Stat Med. 2002;21:2313–2324. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
61. Deeks JJ. Systematic reviews in health care: Systematic reviews of evaluations of diagnostic and screening tests. BMJ. 2001;323:157–162. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
62. Littenberg B, Moses LE. Estimating diagnostic accuracy from multiple conflicting reports: a new meta-analytic method. Med Decis Making. 1993;13:313–321. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
63. Reitsma JB, Glas AS, Rutjes AW, Scholten RJ, Bossuyt PM, Zwinderman AH. Bivariate analysis of sensitivity and specificity produces informative summary measures in diagnostic reviews. J Clin Epidemiol. 2005;58:982–990. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
64. Rutter CM, Gatsonis CA. A hierarchical regression approach to meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy evaluations. Stat Med. 2001;20:2865–2884. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
65. Arends LR. Multivariate meta-analysis: modelling the heterogeneity. Rotterdam: Erasmus University; 2006. [Google Scholar]
66. Riley RD, Abrams KR, Sutton AJ, Lambert PC, Thompson JR. Bivariate random-effects meta-analysis and the estimation of between-study correlation. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2007;7:3. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
67. Trikalinos TA, Olkin I. A method for the meta-analysis of mutually exclusive binary outcomes. Stat Med. 2008;27:4279–4300. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
68. Trikalinos TA, Salanti G, Zintzaras E, Ioannidis JP. Meta-analysis methods. Adv Genet. 2008;60:311–334. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
69. Nóesch E, Trelle S, Reichenbach S, Rutjes AW, Bórgi E, Scherer M, et al. The effects of excluding patients from the analysis in randomized controlled trials: meta-epidemiological study. BMJ. 2009;339:b3244. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
70. Wood L, Egger M, Gluud LL, Schulz KF, Jóni P, Altman DG, et al. Empirical evidence of bias in treatment effect estimates in controlled trials with different interventions and outcomes: meta-epidemiological study. BMJ. 2008;336:601–605. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
71. Stroup DF, Berlin JA, Morton SC, Olkin I, Williamson GD, Rennie D, et al. Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: a proposal for reporting. Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) group. JAMA. 2000;283:2008–2012. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
72. LeLorier J, Grégoire G, Benhaddad A, Lapierre J, Derderian F. Discrepancies between meta-analyses and subsequent large randomized, controlled trials. N Engl J Med. 1997;337:536–542. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
73. Nissen SE, Wolski K. Effect of rosiglitazone on the risk of myocardial infarction and death from cardiovascular causes. N Engl J Med. 2007;356:2457–2471. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
74. Home PD, Pocock SJ, Beck-Nielsen H, Curtis PS, Gomis R, Hanefeld M, et al. Rosiglitazone Evaluated for Cardiovascular Outcomes in Oral Agent Combination Therapy for Type 2 Diabetes (RECORD) Lancet. 2009;373:2125–2135. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
75. Hlatky MA, Bravata DM. Review: rosiglitazone increases risk of MI but does not differ from other drugs for CV death in type 2 diabetes. Evid Based Med. 2007;12:169–170. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Page 2
Hierarchy of evidence
Click on the image to see a larger version.