pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Systematic reviews in health care: Assessing the quality of controlled clinical trials - PubMed

  • ️Mon Jan 01 2001

Review

Systematic reviews in health care: Assessing the quality of controlled clinical trials

P Jüni et al. BMJ. 2001.

No abstract available

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure
Figure

Meta-analysis of four empirical studies relating key aspects of methodological quality of controlled trials to their effect estimates. Meta-analysis was by random effects model. Size of squares is proportional to inverse of variance of estimate

Figure
Figure

Systematic Reviews in Health Care: Meta-analysis in Context can be purchased through the BMJ Bookshop (

www.bmjbookshop.com

); further information and updates for the book are available on

www.systematicreviews.uom

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Clarke M, Oxman AD, eds. Cochrane reviewers' handbook 4.0. In: Cochrane Collaboration. Cochrane Library. Oxford: Update Software, 1999.
    1. Cook DJ, Sackett DL, Spitzer WO. Methodologic guidelines for systematic reviews of randomized control trials in health care from the Potsdam consultation on meta-analysis. J Clin Epidemiol. 1995;48:167–171. - PubMed
    1. Detsky AS, Naylor CD, O'Rourke K, McGeer AJ, L'Abbé KA. Incorporating variations in the quality of individual randomized trials into meta-analysis. J Clin Epidemiol. 1992;45:255–265. - PubMed
    1. Moher D, Jadad AR, Nichol G, Penman M, Tugwell P, Walsh S. Assessing the quality of randomized controlled trials: an annotated bibliography of scales and checklists. Controlled Clin Trials. 1995;16:62–73. - PubMed
    1. Jüni P, Witschi A, Bloch R, Egger M. The hazards of scoring the quality of clinical trial for meta-analysis. JAMA. 1999;282:1054–1060. - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms