Publication:
Methods to systematically review and meta-analyse observational studies: a systematic scoping review of recommendations.

cris.virtual.author-orcid0000-0001-7462-5132
cris.virtualsource.author-orcide337e9e4-7216-4bbb-a421-a812e0a21bfe
cris.virtualsource.author-orcidde65e5d1-1c23-42d7-850b-a64fae8ec75b
cris.virtualsource.author-orcida47a659b-5a23-43fa-86e3-f9401108114c
cris.virtualsource.author-orcid0c5b19b9-229c-4307-9a20-e431e6933d4b
cris.virtualsource.author-orcid1e763b97-c5dd-498f-a07c-4d12cf80b661
datacite.rightsopen.access
dc.contributor.authorMüller, Monika
dc.contributor.authorD'Addario, Maddalena
dc.contributor.authorEgger, Matthias
dc.contributor.authorCevallos Rosero, Myriam
dc.contributor.authorDekkers, Olaf
dc.contributor.authorMugglin, Catrina Andrea
dc.contributor.authorScott, Pippa
dc.date.accessioned2024-10-25T14:52:20Z
dc.date.available2024-10-25T14:52:20Z
dc.date.issued2018-05-21
dc.description.abstractBACKGROUND Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of observational studies are frequently performed, but no widely accepted guidance is available at present. We performed a systematic scoping review of published methodological recommendations on how to systematically review and meta-analyse observational studies. METHODS We searched online databases and websites and contacted experts in the field to locate potentially eligible articles. We included articles that provided any type of recommendation on how to conduct systematic reviews and meta-analyses of observational studies. We extracted and summarised recommendations on pre-defined key items: protocol development, research question, search strategy, study eligibility, data extraction, dealing with different study designs, risk of bias assessment, publication bias, heterogeneity, statistical analysis. We summarised recommendations by key item, identifying areas of agreement and disagreement as well as areas where recommendations were missing or scarce. RESULTS The searches identified 2461 articles of which 93 were eligible. Many recommendations for reviews and meta-analyses of observational studies were transferred from guidance developed for reviews and meta-analyses of RCTs. Although there was substantial agreement in some methodological areas there was also considerable disagreement on how evidence synthesis of observational studies should be conducted. Conflicting recommendations were seen on topics such as the inclusion of different study designs in systematic reviews and meta-analyses, the use of quality scales to assess the risk of bias, and the choice of model (e.g. fixed vs. random effects) for meta-analysis. CONCLUSION There is a need for sound methodological guidance on how to conduct systematic reviews and meta-analyses of observational studies, which critically considers areas in which there are conflicting recommendations.
dc.description.numberOfPages18
dc.description.sponsorshipZentrum für Translationale Forschung der Universitätsklinik für Psychiatrie und Psychotherapie
dc.description.sponsorshipInstitut für Sozial- und Präventivmedizin (ISPM)
dc.description.sponsorshipClinical Trials Unit Bern (CTU)
dc.identifier.doi10.7892/boris.116791
dc.identifier.pmid29783954
dc.identifier.publisherDOI10.1186/s12874-018-0495-9
dc.identifier.urihttps://boris-portal.unibe.ch/handle/20.500.12422/162167
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherBioMed Central
dc.relation.ispartofBMC Medical research methodology
dc.relation.issn1471-2288
dc.relation.organizationInstitute of Social and Preventive Medicine
dc.relation.organizationDepartment of Clinical Research (DCR)
dc.relation.organizationZentrum für Translationale Forschung der Universitätsklinik für Psychiatrie und Psychotherapie
dc.subjectMeta-analysis Methods Observational studies Recommendation Systematic review
dc.subject.ddc600 - Technology::610 - Medicine & health
dc.subject.ddc300 - Social sciences, sociology & anthropology::360 - Social problems & social services
dc.titleMethods to systematically review and meta-analyse observational studies: a systematic scoping review of recommendations.
dc.typearticle
dspace.entity.typePublication
dspace.file.typetext
oaire.citation.issue1
oaire.citation.startPage44
oaire.citation.volume18
oairecerif.author.affiliationZentrum für Translationale Forschung der Universitätsklinik für Psychiatrie und Psychotherapie
oairecerif.author.affiliationInstitut für Sozial- und Präventivmedizin (ISPM)
oairecerif.author.affiliationInstitut für Sozial- und Präventivmedizin (ISPM)
oairecerif.author.affiliationClinical Trials Unit Bern (CTU)
oairecerif.author.affiliationInstitut für Sozial- und Präventivmedizin (ISPM)
oairecerif.author.affiliation2Institut für Sozial- und Präventivmedizin (ISPM)
unibe.contributor.rolecreator
unibe.contributor.rolecreator
unibe.contributor.rolecreator
unibe.contributor.rolecreator
unibe.contributor.rolecreator
unibe.contributor.rolecreator
unibe.contributor.rolecreator
unibe.date.licenseChanged2019-10-22 23:08:14
unibe.description.ispublishedpub
unibe.eprints.legacyId116791
unibe.journal.abbrevTitleBMC MED RES METHODOL
unibe.refereedtrue
unibe.subtype.articlejournal

Files

Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Name:
Mueller BMCMedResMethodol 2018.pdf
Size:
1.07 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
File Type:
text
License:
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
Content:
published

Collections