"Meta-analysis: statistical alchemy for the 21st century": discussion. A plea for a more balanced view of meta-analysis and systematic overviews of the effect of health care interventions.

Abstract

The paper discusses some of the most common criticisms to meta-analysis presented by Professor Feinstein in this Conference. As many of the points raised in his contributions are not new, a critique to them is presented in the context of the type of contribution given by systematic reviews (meta-analysis) to the analysis of the effects of health care interventions. After discussing some terminological issues, the paper challenges Feinsteins' arguments indicating that meta-analysis is inherently faulted on four grounds: (a) reproducibility, (b) precision, (c) suitable extrapolation, (d) fair comparison. Each point is discussed providing examples drawn from the published literature with a view to indicate that--despite their current limitations--systematic reviews are a necessary step to synthesize information, orient clinical research and help produce practice guidelines.

Statistics

0200400600800'00'02'04'06'08'10'12'14'16
Citations per Year

1,332 Citations

Semantic Scholar estimates that this publication has 1,332 citations based on the available data.

See our FAQ for additional information.

Cite this paper

@article{Liberati1995MetaanalysisSA, title={"Meta-analysis: statistical alchemy for the 21st century": discussion. A plea for a more balanced view of meta-analysis and systematic overviews of the effect of health care interventions.}, author={Alessandro Liberati}, journal={Journal of clinical epidemiology}, year={1995}, volume={48 1}, pages={81-6} }