Browsing by Autor "C. Hooper"

Filter results by typing the first few letters
Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item type: Item ,
    A comprehensive guide to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis in medical research
    (Wolters Kluwer, 2025) Ernesto Calderón Martinez; Patricia E. Ghattas Hasbun; Vanessa Pamela Salolin Vargas; Oxiris Yexalén García‐González; Mariela D. Fermin Madera; Diego E. Rueda Capistrán; Thomas Campos Carmona; Camila Sánchez Cruz; C. Hooper
    Systematic reviews and meta-analyses are essential tools in medical research. Systematic reviews are a type of literature review that uses a systematic process to identify and assess all available literature on a specific research question. A meta-analysis is a statistical method of synthesizing the results of a systematic review by quantitatively combining data. The process begins with formulating a well-defined research question using frameworks. Comprehensive literature searches across multiple databases, including PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane, to ensure the inclusion of diverse studies. Tools like EndNote and Covidence streamline reference management and study selection, enhancing efficiency and accuracy. Quality assessment using tools like the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale is crucial to evaluate the methodological rigor. Data extraction, using standardized forms to ensure consistent information capture. Qualitative synthesis is one method that integrates the results of a systematic review focusing on textual data. Meta-analysis employs statistical software such as R and RevMan to compute effect sizes, confidence intervals, and assess heterogeneity. Visual representations, including forest and funnel plots, facilitate the interpretation of results. Challenges such as publication bias and heterogeneity are addressed using statistical methods like Egger regression and the trim-and-fill technique. Sensitivity analyses further validate the robustness of findings. Common errors, including data entry mistakes and inappropriate pooling, are mitigated through rigorous methodological adherence and critical self-evaluation. Meticulously conducted, systematic reviews and meta-analyses represent the pinnacle of the evidence hierarchy, driving advancements in medical research and practice.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item type: Item ,
    Comparison of middle meningeal artery embolization alone, in combination with surgery, and surgery alone for chronic subdural hematoma: a network meta-analysis of 143,590 patients
    (Springer Science+Business Media, 2025) Alireza Soltani Khaboushan; Pavel S. Pichardo‐Rojas; Amirhossein Zare; Amirhossein Kamroo; Aysan Moeinafshar; C. Hooper; Yoshua Esquenazi; Adnan Siddiqui; Leonardo Rangel-Castilla
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item type: Item ,
    Hemobilia: A Narrative Review of Current Diagnostic Techniques and Emerging Management Strategies
    (Cureus, Inc., 2024) T. Grau Carmona; C. Hooper; Vaidarshi Abbagoni; Haya Al Shakkakee; Aarfa Devani; J. Illan; Valencia Maryjose; Eduardo González; Ilean López Cervantes