Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Design
Review
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
May enhance surgeons' critical appraisal of meta-analyses; leaves open effects on practice and outcomes.
Meta-analyses are an essential tool of clinical research. Meta-analyses of individual randomized controlled trials frequently constitute the highest possible level of scientific evidence for a given research question and allow surgeons to rapidly gain a comprehensive understanding of an important clinical issue. Moreover, meta-analyses often serve as cornerstones for evidence-based surgery, treatment guidelines, and knowledge transfer. Given the importance of meta-analyses to the medical (and surgical) knowledge base, it is of cardinal importance that surgeons have a basic grasp of the principles that guide a high-quality meta-analysis, and be able to weigh objectively the advantages and potential pitfalls of this clinical research tool. Unfortunately, surgeons are often ill-prepared to successfully conduct, critically appraise, and correctly interpret meta-analyses. The objective of this educational review is to provide surgeons with a brief introductory overview of the knowledge and skills required for understanding and critically appraising surgical meta-analyses as well as assessing their implications for their own surgical practice.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lawrentschuk et al. (2009) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: