Abstract
In the era of evidence-based decision-making systematic reviews and meta-analyses are being widely used in many medical practices, public health departments, government programs, business offices, and academic disciplines including education and psychology.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Breckon J (2016) Evidence base for evidence-informed policy. Significance Mag 13:12–13
Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carroll D, Jenkinson C, Reynolds DJM, Gavaghan DJ, McQuay HJ (1996) Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary? Control Clin Trials 17(1):1–12
Khan KS, Kunz R, Kleijnen J, Antes G (2003) Five steps to conducting a systematic review. J R Soc Med 96(3):118–121
Khan S, Doi SAR, Memon MA (2016) Evidence based decision and meta-analysis with applications in cancer research studies. Appl Math Inf Sci 10(3):1–8
Langer L, Tripney J, Gough DA (2016) The science of using science: researching the use of research evidence in decision-making. UCL Institute of Education, EPPI-Centre
Melnyk BM, Fineout-Overholt E (2011) Evidence-based practice in nursing & healthcare: a guide to best practice. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
Memon MA, Subramanya MS, Khan S, Hossain MB, Osland E, Memon B (2011) Meta-analysis of D1 versus D2 gastrectomy for gastric adenocarcinoma. Ann Surg 253(5):900–911. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0b013e318212bff6
Memon MA., Khan S, Alam K, Rahman MM, Yunus RM (2020) Systematic REviews: Understanding the Best Evidences for clinical Decision-making in Health care: Pros adnd COns, Surgical Laparoscopy, Endoscopy & Percutaneous Techniques.
Moher D, Cook DJ, Eastwood S, Olkin I, Rennie D, Stroup DF (1999) Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement. Quality of reporting of meta-analyses. Lancet 354(9193):1896–1900
Moher D, Cook DJ, Eastwood S, Olkin I, Rennie D, Stroup DF (2000) Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement. Oncol Res Treat 23(6):597–602
Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG (2009) Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Ann Intern Med 151(4):264–269
Moher D, Hopewell S, Schulz KF, Montori V, Gøtzsche PC, Devereaux P, Altman DG (2012) CONSORT 2010 explanation and elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. Int J Surg 10(1):28–55
Moher D, Shamseer L, Clarke M, Ghersi D, Liberati A, Petticrew M, Stewart LA (2015) Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Syst Rev 4:1
Sterne JA, Hernán MA, Reeves BC, Savović J, Berkman ND, Viswanathan M, Boutron I (2016) ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions. BMJ 355:i4919
Stroup DF, Berlin JA, Morton SC, Olkin I, Williamson GD, Rennie D, Moher D, Becker BJ, Sipe TA, Thacker SB (2000) Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: a proposal for reporting. Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology (MOOSE) group. JAMA 283(15):2008–2012
Yannascoli SM, Schenker ML, Carey JL, Ahn J, Baldwin KD (2013) How to write a systematic review: a step-by-step guide. Univ Pennsylvania Orthop J 23:64–69
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Khan, S. (2020). Introduction to Systematic Review. In: Meta-Analysis. Statistics for Biology and Health. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-5032-4_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-5032-4_1
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-15-5031-7
Online ISBN: 978-981-15-5032-4
eBook Packages: Mathematics and StatisticsMathematics and Statistics (R0)