You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT JAMA
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 274 No. 24, December 27, 1995 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  JAMA
  •  Online Features
  Commentary
 This Article
 •References
 •Full text PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citation map
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Similar articles in JAMA
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

A Concern for Standards

David Moher, MSc; Ingram Olkin, PhD

JAMA. 1995;274(24):1962-1964.

Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

Evidence-based health care is becoming increasingly popular and, at least in some settings, is being used to assist in the creation of health care policy.1 Meta-analyses are a key component of evidence-based health care. Such analyses pool individual randomized controlled trials (RCTs) together to arrive at an overall estimate of the effect of the intervention under consideration. Meta-analyses offer several potential advantages. They provide a systematic and explicit method for synthesizing evidence, a quantitative overall estimate (and confidence intervals) derived from the individual studies, and early evidence as to the effectiveness of treatments, thus reducing the need for continued study. They also can address questions in specific subgroups that individual studies may not have examined.

There has been a striking increase in the number of published meta-analyses of RCTs. One of the first medical metaanalyses was published in JAMA in 1955.2 By June 1992, the number of meta-analyses . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]


Author Affiliations

From the Clinical Epidemiology Unit, Loeb Medical Research Institute and the Department of Medicine, University of Ottawa (Mr Moher), and the Department of Statistics, Stanford University, Stanford, Calif (Dr Olkin).


Footnotes

Reprint requests to the Clinical Epidemiology Unit, Loeb Medical Research Institute, Ottawa Civic Hospital, 1053 Carling Ave, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada K1Y 4E9 (Mr Moher).



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 1995 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.