Format

Send to

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
JAMA. 2014 Jul;312(2):171-9. doi: 10.1001/jama.2014.5559.

How to read a systematic review and meta-analysis and apply the results to patient care: users' guides to the medical literature.

Author information

1
Division of Preventive Medicine and Knowledge and Evaluation Research Unit, Mayo Clinic, Minnesota.
2
Knowledge and Evaluation Research Unit, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
3
Departments of Medicine and Health Research and Policy, Stanford University School of Medicine; Department of Statistics, Stanford University School of Humanities and Sciences; and Meta-Research Innovation Center at Stanford (METRICS), Stanford University.
4
Departments of Medicine and Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
5
Departments of Medicine and Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics and Population Health Research Institute, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
6
All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi.
7
Department of Internal Medicine, School of Medicine, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile.
8
Evidence-Based Dentistry Unit, Faculty of Dentistry, Universidad de Chile, Santiago, Chile, and Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
9
Department Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
10
Department of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
11
Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
12
Columbia University Medical Center, New York, New York.

Abstract

Clinical decisions should be based on the totality of the best evidence and not the results of individual studies. When clinicians apply the results of a systematic review or meta-analysis to patient care, they should start by evaluating the credibility of the methods of the systematic review, ie, the extent to which these methods have likely protected against misleading results. Credibility depends on whether the review addressed a sensible clinical question; included an exhaustive literature search; demonstrated reproducibility of the selection and assessment of studies; and presented results in a useful manner. For reviews that are sufficiently credible, clinicians must decide on the degree of confidence in the estimates that the evidence warrants (quality of evidence). Confidence depends on the risk of bias in the body of evidence; the precision and consistency of the results; whether the results directly apply to the patient of interest; and the likelihood of reporting bias. Shared decision making requires understanding of the estimates of magnitude of beneficial and harmful effects, and confidence in those estimates.

PMID:
25005654
DOI:
10.1001/jama.2014.5559
[Indexed for MEDLINE]
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments
How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Full text links

    Icon for Silverchair Information Systems
    Loading ...
    Support Center