Various biases in systematic review and meta-analysis and their assessment.

IF 2.9 Q1 ANESTHESIOLOGY
Indian Journal of Anaesthesia Pub Date : 2025-01-01 Epub Date: 2025-01-11 DOI:10.4103/ija.ija_1212_24
Abhijit S Nair, Nitin K Borkar
{"title":"Various biases in systematic review and meta-analysis and their assessment.","authors":"Abhijit S Nair, Nitin K Borkar","doi":"10.4103/ija.ija_1212_24","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Systematic reviews and meta-analyses synthesise existing evidence for clinical and scientific decision-making. Clinicians and researchers need to understand how to interpret the evidence with the bias involved, as well as the various available tools and how to use them when performing a systematic review. The validity of systematic reviews and meta-analyses depends on comprehensive assessment and mitigation of biases. Biases have the potential to compromise the validity and reliability of results. By being aware of and addressing these different biases, researchers and clinicians can more confidently interpret findings and increase the impact and dependability of their conclusions. The article discusses the biases involved in systematic reviews and meta-analyses and various ways to assess them.</p>","PeriodicalId":13339,"journal":{"name":"Indian Journal of Anaesthesia","volume":"69 1","pages":"138-142"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11878363/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Indian Journal of Anaesthesia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/ija.ija_1212_24","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/11 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Systematic reviews and meta-analyses synthesise existing evidence for clinical and scientific decision-making. Clinicians and researchers need to understand how to interpret the evidence with the bias involved, as well as the various available tools and how to use them when performing a systematic review. The validity of systematic reviews and meta-analyses depends on comprehensive assessment and mitigation of biases. Biases have the potential to compromise the validity and reliability of results. By being aware of and addressing these different biases, researchers and clinicians can more confidently interpret findings and increase the impact and dependability of their conclusions. The article discusses the biases involved in systematic reviews and meta-analyses and various ways to assess them.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
44.80%
发文量
210
审稿时长
36 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信