scholarly journals Statins in hypercholesterolaemia: A dose-specific meta-analysis of lipid changes in randomised, double blind trials

2003 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jayne E Edwards ◽  
R Andrew Moore
Keyword(s):  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Blind Trials

QUESTION FOR META-ANALYSTS: CAN YOU MAKE A SILKEN PURSE OUT OF A SOW'S EAR?

PEDIATRICS ◽  
1989 ◽  
Vol 84 (4) ◽  
pp. A108-A108
Author(s):  
Student
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Multiple Comparisons ◽  
Measurement Scales ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
New Drug ◽  
Baseline Difference ◽  
Blind Trials

Choice of dose [in 196 double-blind trials of treatments for rheumatoid arthritis], multiple comparisons, wrong calculation, sub-group and within-group analyses, wrong sampling units. . . , change in measurement scales before analyses, baseline difference, and selecting reporting of significant results were some of the verified or possible causes for the large proportion of results that favored the [newly proposed] drug. Doubtful or invalid statements were found in 76% of the conclusions or abstracts. Bias consistently favored the new drug in 81 trials, and the control in only one trial. It is not obvious how a reliable meta-analysis could be done [reliably] in these trials.

Protective Effects of Steroids in Cardiac Surgery: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Double-Blind Trials

2011 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 156-165 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giangiuseppe Cappabianca ◽  
Crescenzia Rotunno ◽  
Luigi de Luca Tupputi Schinosa ◽  
V. Marco Ranieri ◽  
Domenico Paparella
Keyword(s):  
Cardiac Surgery ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Protective Effects ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Blind Trials
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document