Meta-evaluation of meta-analysis: ten appraisal questions for biologists

BMC Biology

Review

Alistair M. Senior¹  Malgorzata Lagisz²  Daniel W. A. Noble²  Shinichi Nakagawa³ 

[1] Charles Perkins Centre, University of Sydney, 2006, Sydney, NSW, Australia;School of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Sydney, 2006, Sydney, NSW, Australia;Evolution & Ecology Research Centre and School of Biological, Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of New South Wales, 2052, Sydney, NSW, Australia;Evolution & Ecology Research Centre and School of Biological, Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of New South Wales, 2052, Sydney, NSW, Australia;Diabetes and Metabolism Division, Garvan Institute of Medical Research, 384 Victoria Street, Darlinghurst, 2010, Sydney, NSW, Australia;

关键词: Effect size;    Biological importance;    Non-independence;    Meta-regression;    Meta-research;    Publication bias;    Quantitative synthesis;    Reporting bias;    Statistical significance;    Systematic review;   

DOI  :  10.1186/s12915-017-0357-7

来源: Springer

【 摘 要 】

Meta-analysis is a statistical procedure for analyzing the combined data from different studies, and can be a major source of concise up-to-date information. The overall conclusions of a meta-analysis, however, depend heavily on the quality of the meta-analytic process, and an appropriate evaluation of the quality of meta-analysis (meta-evaluation) can be challenging. We outline ten questions biologists can ask to critically appraise a meta-analysis. These questions could also act as simple and accessible guidelines for the authors of meta-analyses. We focus on meta-analyses using non-human species, which we term ‘biological’ meta-analysis. Our ten questions are aimed at enabling a biologist to evaluate whether a biological meta-analysis embodies ‘mega-enlightenment’, a ‘mega-mistake’, or something in between.

【 授权许可】

CC BY   
© The Author(s). 2017

【 图 表 】

Fig. 4