Key result
Meta-analysis of observational studies in psychosomatic medicine can provide summary estimates and discover relevant confounders, mediators, and moderators.
This review highlights the utility of meta-analysis in observational psychosomatic research for identifying sources of heterogeneity and summarizing associations.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
May aid synthesis of heterogeneous psychosomatic data; leaves open clinical translation pending prospective validation.
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.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Tak et al. (2010) conducted a review in Psychosomatic medicine. Meta-analysis of observational studies in psychosomatic medicine can provide summary estimates and discover relevant confounders, mediators, and moderators.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: