Journal
PSYCHOSOMATIC MEDICINE
Volume 72, Issue 3, Pages 253-265Publisher
LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/PSY.0b013e3181d714e1
Keywords
meta-analysis; effect size; heterogeneity; meta-regression; mega-analysis; observational studies
Categories
Funding
- Dutch Medical Research Council [016.086.397, 016.056.064]
Ask authors/readers for more resources
Meta-analyses may contribute to more reliable knowledge about the existence of certain relations in the area of psychosomatic research. Surprisingly, the increasing popularity of meta-analysis is not reflected in the number of meta-analyses of observational studies published in Psychosomatic Medicine. This may be due to the specific difficulties that apply to meta-analyses of observational research. The aim of this paper is to provide a nontechnical overview of the principles of meta-analysis applied to observational research. We will highlight general principles of meta-analysis and discuss the major threats to its validity, with an emphasis on its specific merits and pitfalls for psychosomatic research, using several examples. We conclude that meta-analysis is a relatively simple technique, leaving little reason for not routinely applying it when performing a systematic review. An adequately conducted meta-analysis may not only provide a summary estimate of a certain association, but it has additional value in discovering relevant confounders, mediators, and moderators, as well as identifying areas of research that require more attention.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available