In domestic studies, the Korean databases KoreaMed, KMBASE, and RISS4U may be included.
Typically, the three bibliographic databases Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) are used. In order to secure proper basis for evidence-based research, it is essential to perform a broad search that includes as many studies as possible that meet the inclusion and exclusion criteria.
In addition, selection of the research topic is based on logical evidence, and it is important to select a topic that is familiar to readers without clearly confirmed the evidence. However, study selection via a systematic review is a precondition for performing a meta-analysis, and it is important to clearly define the Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes (PICO) parameters that are central to evidence-based research. If the studies contain data on the same topic that can be combined, a meta-analysis can even be performed using data from only two studies. Here, the definition of the word “similar” is not made clear, but when selecting a topic for the meta-analysis, it is essential to ensure that the different studies present data that can be combined. A meta-analysis is the statistical process of analyzing and combining results from several similar studies. Therefore, in this review, we aim to describe the contents and methods used in systematic reviews and meta-analyses in a way that is easy to understand for future authors and readers of systematic review and meta-analysis.Ī systematic review attempts to gather all available empirical research by using clearly defined, systematic methods to obtain answers to a specific question. If readers indiscriminately accept the results of the many meta-analyses that are published, incorrect data may be obtained. However, a lack of understanding about systematic reviews and meta-analyses can lead to incorrect outcomes being derived from the review and analysis processes. Thus, literature reviews and meta-analyses are being conducted in diverse medical fields, and the aim of highlighting their importance is to help better extract accurate, good quality data from the flood of data being produced. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses include various topics, such as comparing various treatments of postoperative nausea and vomiting, comparing general anesthesia and regional anesthesia, comparing airway maintenance devices, comparing various methods of postoperative pain control (e.g., patient-controlled analgesia pumps, nerve block, or analgesics), comparing the precision of various monitoring instruments, and meta-analysis of dose-response in various drugs. In anesthesiology, the importance of systematic reviews and meta-analyses has been highlighted, and they provide diagnostic and therapeutic value to various areas, including not only perioperative management but also intensive care and outpatient anesthesia. In 2009, the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement was published, and it greatly helped standardize and improve the quality of systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Following the Quality of Reporting of Meta-analyses (QUORUM) statement, and the appearance of registers such as Cochrane Library’s Methodology Register, a large number of systematic literature reviews have been registered.
Since 1999, various papers have presented guidelines for reporting meta-analyses of RCTs. Usually, in order to obtain more reliable results, a meta-analysis is mainly conducted on randomized controlled trials (RCTs), which have a high level of evidence ( Fig. A meta-analysis is a valid, objective, and scientific method of analyzing and combining different results. During the systematic review process, the quality of studies is evaluated, and a statistical meta-analysis of the study results is conducted on the basis of their quality. A systematic review collects all possible studies related to a given topic and design, and reviews and analyzes their results.
0 kommentar(er)
