Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses

Abstract

As the number of scientifi c publications steadily increases, clinicians, patients, and policy makers benefit from succinct syntheses of the available evidence. Single studies could be underpowered (resulting in a failure to detect differences between interventions and the reporting of false-negative effects), or their findings might conflict with those of other similar studies. Systematic reviews can help address these issues by arbitrating differences between confl icting studies with a more objective and transparent approach compared to narrative reviews. They also serve to generalize fi ndings across various studies that report on specific subgroups of patient populations. Moreover, when appropriate, they can aggregate findings through meta-analysis to report more precise treatment effects.