 |
 |
Dear Diana, Systematic review is a research methodology that is used for finding the best evidence. It has its own methodologies that should be followed appropriately. Meta-analysis is statistical process that have been extensively used in systematic reviews. But you may do a systematic review without using meta-analysis within it. For simplicity, their relation is similar to the relationship that is between clinical trial and -for example - intention-to-treat analysis. As RCTs are the most proper sources for getting evidence by systematic reviews, meta-analysis has been developed to extract and pull the dispersed results of clinical trials (and other studies) and find the overall result. You may see the fourth CRD report online: http://www.york.ac.uk/inst/crd/report4.htm. There is a sery of published papers on meta-anlysis on BMJ website (http://www.bmj.com) that you can use them for further information. Arash > "Dra. Diana Rodriguez" wrote: > > Dear list members: > Please, I would like to know if some person can explain me about the > real difference between : Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. > And, Are the Meta-Analyses exclusive for Clinical trials?. > Thanks in advance, with my best wishes . > From the land of the Incas. > > DIANA . -- Arash Rashidian, MD Department of Health Sciences and Clinical Evaluation Alcuin College, University of York Heslington, York YO10 5DD, UK Tel: +44(0)1904 434498 Fax: +44(0)1904 434517 email: [log in to unmask] %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%