Annals of Emergency Medicine
Volume 36, Issue 3 , Pages 233-236 , September 2000

Dueling Meta-Analyses

References 

  1. Rowe BH, Bretzlaff JA, Bourdon C, et al.  Intravenous magnesium sulfate treatment for acute asthma in the emergency department: a systematic review of the literature. Ann Emerg Med. 2000;36:181–190
  2. Alter HJ, Koepsell TD, Hilty WM. Intravenous magnesium as an adjuvant in acute bronchospasm: a meta-analysis. Ann Emerg Med. 2000;36:191–197
  3. Greenland S. Can meta-analysis be salvaged?. Am J Epidemiol. 1994;140:783–787
  4. Moher D, Cook DJ, Eastwood S, et al.  Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement. Quality of Reporting of Meta-analyses. Lancet. 1999;354:1896–1900
  5. Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carroll D, et al.  Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary?. Control Clin Trials. 1996;17:1–12
  6. Juni P, Witschi A, Bloch R, et al.  The hazards of scoring the quality of clinical trials for meta-analysis. JAMA. 1999;282:1054–1060 [see comments]
  7. Chalmers TC, Celano P, Sacks HS, et al.  Bias in treatment allocation in controlled clinical trials. N Engl J Med. 1983;309:1358–1361
  8. Schulz KF, Chalmers I, Hayes RJ, et al.  Empirical evidence of bias. JAMA. 1995;273:408–412
  9. Moher D, Pham B, Jones A, et al.  Does the quality of reports of randomised trials affect estimates of intervention efficacy reported in meta-analyses?. Lancet. 1998;352:609–613
  10. Lijmer JG, Mol BW, Heisterkamp S, et al.  Empirical evidence of design-related bias in studies of diagnostic tests. JAMA. 1999;282:1061–1066
  11. Coronary Drug Project Research Group . Influence of adherence to treatment and response of cholesterol on mortality in the Coronary Drug Project. N Engl J Med. 1980;303:1038–1041
  12. Greenland S. Quality scores are useless and potentially misleading. Am J Epidemiol. 1994;140:300–301
  13. Berlin JA, Rennie D. Measuring the quality of trials: the quality of quality scales. JAMA. 1999;282:1083–1085 [editorial; comment]
  14. Greenland S. Invited commentary: a critical look at some popular meta-analytic methods. Am J Epidemiol. 1994;140:290–296 [see comments]
  15. Thompson SG. Why sources of heterogeneity in meta-analysis should be investigated. BMJ. 1994;309:1351–1355
  16. Pocock S. Meta-analysis. Stat Methods Med Res. 1993;2:117–119 [editorial]
  17. Boissel JP, Blanchard J, Panak E, et al.  Considerations for the meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. Summary of a panel discussion. Control Clin Trials. 1989;10:254–281
  18. L’Abbé KA, Detsky AS, O’Rourke K. Meta-analysis in clinical research. Ann Intern Med. 1987;107:224–233
  19. Hedges LV, Olkin I. Statistical Methods for Meta-Analysis. New York, NY: Academic Press; 1985;
  20. In:  Cooper H,  Hedges LV editor. Handbook of Research Synthesis. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation; 1994;
  21. Greenland S. Quantitative methods in the review of epidemiologic literature. Epidemiol Rev. 1987;9:1–30
  22. Greenland S, Schlesselman JJ, Criqui MH. The fallacy of employing standardized regression coefficients and correlations as measures of effect. Am J Epidemiol. 1986;123:203–208

☆ Address for reprints: Robert L. Wears, MD, MS, Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Florida Health Science Center, 655 West 8th Street, Jacksonville, FL 32209; 904-549-4124, 904-549-4508; E-mail wears@ufl.edu .

PII: S0196-0644(00)26585-2

doi: 10.1067/mem.2000.109692

Annals of Emergency Medicine
Volume 36, Issue 3 , Pages 233-236 , September 2000

Article Tools