Download PDF
Dtsch Med Wochenschr 2007; 132: e48-e52
DOI: 10.1055/s-2007-959042
Statistik | Statistics

© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Systematische Übersichten und Meta-Analysen

- Artikel Nr. 19 der Statistik-Serie in der DMW -Systematic reviews and meta-analysesA. Ziegler1 , S. Lange2 , R. Bender2
  • 1Institut für Medizinische Biometrie und Statistik, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Lübeck, Universität zu Lübeck
  • 2Institut für Qualität und Wirtschaftlichkeit im Gesundheitswesen, Köln
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
25 May 2007 (online)

Also available at
   Permissions and Reprints

Schlüsselwörter

Systematische Übersicht - Meta-Analyse - Heterogenität - Zufällige Effekte

Key words

Systematic reviews - Meta-analysis - Heterogeneity - Random effects

Literatur

  • 1 Altman D G. et al . The revised CONSORT statement for reporting randomized trials: Explanation and elaboration.  Ann Intern Med. 2001;  134 663-694
    Google Scholar
  • 2 Beecher H K. The powerful placebo.  JAMA. 1955;  159 1602-1606
    Google Scholar
  • 3 Bender R, Lange S. Die Vierfeldertafel.  Dtsch Med Wochenschr. 2007;  132 e12-e14
    Google Scholar
  • 4 Blettner M, Sauerbrei W. Metaanalysen epidemiologischer Studien.  Med Klin. 1998;  93 442-445
    Google Scholar
  • 5 Bossuyt P M. et al . Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: The STARD initiative.  Radiology. 2003;  226 24-28
    Google Scholar
  • 6 Brockwell S E, Gordon I R. A comparison of statistical methods for meta-analysis.  Stat Med. 2001;  20 825-840
    Google Scholar
  • 7 Davies H TO, Crombie I K. What is meta-analysis?. London: Hayward Medical Communications 2001: 1-7
    Google Scholar
  • 8 Deeks J. Issues in the selection of a summary statistic for meta-analysis of clinical trials with binary outcomes.  Stat Med. 2002;  21 1575-1600
    Google Scholar
  • 9 Döpfmer S, Guggenmoos-Holzmann I. Meta-Analyse.  Dtsch Med Wochenschr. 1997;  122 589-593
    Google Scholar
  • 10 Egger M, Smith G D, Schneider M, Minder C. Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple graphical test.  BMJ. 1997;  315 629-634
    Google Scholar
  • 11 Egger M, Smith G D. Bias in location and selection of studies.  BMJ. 1998;  316 61-66
    Google Scholar
  • 12 Egger M, Smith G D. Meta-Analysis: Potentials and promise.  BMJ. 1997;  315 1371-1374
    Google Scholar
  • 13 Egger M, Smith G D, Altman D G. Systematic Reviews in Health Care. Meta-Analysis in Context. London: BMJ Books 2001
    Google Scholar
  • 14 Egger M, Smith G D, Phillips A N. Meta-analysis: Principles and procedures.  BMJ. 1997;  315 1533-1537
    Google Scholar
  • 15 Glass G V. Primary, secondary, and meta-analysis of research.  Educ Res. 1976;  5 3-8
    Google Scholar
  • 16 Greenhalgh T. How to read a paper: The Medline database.  BMJ. 1997;  315 180-183
    Google Scholar
  • 17 Higgins J PT, Thompson S G. Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis.  Stat Med. 2002;  21 1539-1558
    Google Scholar
  • 18 Hine L K, Laird N, Hewitt P, Chalmers T C. Meta-analytic evidence against prophylactic use of lidocaine in acute myocardial infarction.  Arch Intern Med. 1989;  149 2694-2698
    Google Scholar
  • 19 Moher D, Cook D J, Eastwood S, Olkin I, Rennie D, Stroup D F. Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials: the QUOROM statement.  Lancet. 1999;  354 1896-1900
    Google Scholar
  • 20 Normand S L. Meta-analysis: formulating, evaluating, combining, and reporting.  Stat Med. 1999;  18 321-359
    Google Scholar
  • 21 Pearson K. Report on certain enteric fever inoculation statistics.  BMJ. 1904;  3 1243-1246
    Google Scholar
  • 22 Schäfer H. Anforderungen an eine patientenorientierte klinisch-therapeutische Forschung.  Dtsch Med Wochenschr. 1997;  122 1531-1536
    Google Scholar
  • 23 Stroup D F. et al . Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: A proposal for reporting.  JAMA. 2000;  283 2008-2012
    Google Scholar
  • 24 The Cochrane Controlled Trial Register .Oxford: Update Software. Updated quarterly. The Cochrane Library ed 2004
    Google Scholar
  • 25 Weed D L. Methodologic guidelines for review papers.  J Nat Cancer Inst. 1997;  89 6-7
    Google Scholar
  • 26 Woods D, Trewheellar K. Medline and Embase complement each other in literature searches.  BMJ. 1998;  316 1166
    Google Scholar

Professor Dr. rer. nat. Andreas Ziegler

Institut für Medizinische Biometrie und Statistik, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Lübeck, Universität zu Lübeck

Ratzeburger Allee 160, Haus 4

23538 Lübeck

Email: ziegler@imbs.uni-luebeck.de

      >