References
Colhoun HM, McKeigue PM, Davey Smith G. Problems of reporting genetic associations with complex outcomes. Lancet. 2003;361(9360):865–72.
Minelli C, Thompson JR, Abrams KR, Thakkinstian A, Attia J. The quality of meta-analyses of genetic associations: a review with recommendations. Am J Epidemiol. 2009;170:1333–43.
Boccia S, De Feo E, Gallì P, Gianfagna F, Amore R, Ricciardi G. A systematic review evaluating the methodological aspects of meta-analyses of genetic association studies in cancer research. Eur J Epidemiol (submitted)
Little J, Higgins JPT, editors. 2006. The HuGENet™ HuGE Review Handbook, version 1.0. http://www.hugenet.ca Accessed 28 Feb 2006.
Moher D, Jones A, Lepage L, CONSORT Group (Consolitdated Standards for Reporting of Trials). Use of the CONSORT statement and quality of reports of randomized trials: a comparative before-and-after evaluation. JAMA. 2001;285(15):1992–5.
Delaney A, Bagshaw SM, Ferland A, Manns B, Laupland KB, Doig CJ. A systematic evaluation of the quality of meta-analyses in the critical care literature. Crit Care. 2005;9(5):R575–82.
Pan Z, Trikalinos TA, Kavvoura FK, Lau J, Ioannidis JP. Local literature bias in genetic epidemiology: an empirical evaluation of the Chinese literature. PloS Med. 2005;2:e334.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Minelli, C., Thompson, J. Meta-analysis of genetic association studies: magic tool or dangerous black box?. Eur J Epidemiol 25, 761–763 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10654-010-9492-y
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10654-010-9492-y