A comprehensive guide to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis in medical research

dc.contributor.authorErnesto Calderón Martinez
dc.contributor.authorPatricia E. Ghattas Hasbun
dc.contributor.authorVanessa Pamela Salolin Vargas
dc.contributor.authorOxiris Yexalén García‐González
dc.contributor.authorMariela D. Fermin Madera
dc.contributor.authorDiego E. Rueda Capistrán
dc.contributor.authorThomas Campos Carmona
dc.contributor.authorCamila Sánchez Cruz
dc.contributor.authorC. Hooper
dc.coverage.spatialBolivia
dc.date.accessioned2026-03-22T21:02:50Z
dc.date.available2026-03-22T21:02:50Z
dc.date.issued2025
dc.descriptionCitaciones: 10
dc.description.abstractSystematic 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.
dc.identifier.doi10.1097/md.0000000000041868
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1097/md.0000000000041868
dc.identifier.urihttps://andeanlibrary.org/handle/123456789/85613
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherWolters Kluwer
dc.relation.ispartofMedicine
dc.sourceUniversidad Nacional Autónoma de México
dc.subjectSystematic review
dc.subjectData extraction
dc.subjectMeta-analysis
dc.subjectFunnel plot
dc.subjectPublication bias
dc.subjectMedicine
dc.subjectMEDLINE
dc.subjectData science
dc.subjectComputer science
dc.subjectManagement science
dc.titleA comprehensive guide to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis in medical research
dc.typereview

Files