Pearls of meta-analyses and systematic review in scientific evidence

doi:10.12998/wjcc.v12.i16.2701

Advanced Search

BPG is committed to discovery and dissemination of knowledge

Home / Archive / Volume 12, Issue 16

This Article

Academic Content and Language Evaluation of This Article

CrossCheck and Google Search of This Article

Academic Rules and Norms of This Article

Citation of this article

Corresponding Author of This Article

Research Domain of This Article

Article-Type of This Article

Open-Access Policy of This Article

Times Cited Counts in Google of This Article

Number of Hits and Downloads for This Article

Total Article Views (296)

All Articles published online

The chart showing PDF series, HTML series.

Item

Count

PDF

HTML

209

Sum=218

Publishing Process of This Article

The chart showing Browse series, Download series.

Item

Count

Browse

Download

Sum=66

Jun 6, 2024 (publication date) through Jun 27, 2024

Times Cited of This Article

Times Cited (0)

Journal Information of This Article

Publication Name

World Journal of Clinical Cases

ISSN

2307-8960

Publisher of This Article

Baishideng Publishing Group Inc, 7041 Koll Center Parkway, Suite 160, Pleasanton, CA 94566, USA

Editorial

World J Clin Cases. Jun 6, 2024; 12(16): 2701-2703
Published online Jun 6, 2024. doi: 10.12998/wjcc.v12.i16.2701

Pearls of meta-analyses and systematic review in scientific evidence

Sunny Chi Lik Au

Sunny Chi Lik Au, Department of Ophthalmology, Tung Wah Eastern Hospital, Hong Kong, China

Author contributions: Au SCL conceptualized the editorial, acquired and analyzed the data, and wrote the manuscript. All authors have read and approve the final manuscript.

Conflict-of-interest statement: All authors have disclosed no conflicts of interest.

Open-Access: This article is an open-access article that was selected by an in-house editor and fully peer-reviewed by external reviewers. It is distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: https://creativecommons.org/Licenses/by-nc/4.0/

Corresponding author: Sunny Chi Lik Au, MBChB, Chief Doctor, Surgeon, Department of Ophthalmology, Tung Wah Eastern Hospital, 9/F, MO Office, Lo Ka Chow Memorial Ophthalmic Centre, 19 Eastern Hospital Road, Causeway Bay, Hong Kong, China. kilihcua@gmail.com

Received: March 3, 2024
Revised: April 10, 2024
Accepted: April 23, 2024
Published online: June 6, 2024
Processing time: 87 Days and 2.7 Hours

Core Tip

Core Tip: Scientific evidence evolves from case reports to randomized controlled trials. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses are crucial but can be flawed due to limited information, the so called: “Garbage in, Garbage out”. In running the meta-analysis, mathematical pooling can be invalidated by study heterogeneity, poor study quality, and publication bias. Remedial measures include exploring heterogeneity, restricting meta-analysis to systematic review in case of insufficient information, and addressing different types of bias. Remember, the pearl of meta-analyses relies on quality over quantity in evidence synthesis.