An Introduction to Systematic Review and Meta-analysis: Everything you need to know in 59 minutes
Вставка
- Опубліковано 13 лип 2024
- This lecture was given in May 2020 during the COVID-19 pandemic to internal medicine residents at the university of Toronto. It assumed no prior knowledge of systematic review or meta-analysis.
www.jrnowl.com/
I cannot emphasize how helpful this lecture is. Thank you for making this available. Topics like these are very hard for me to understand on live face-to-face/online lectures. I need to pause a bit, rewind a bit to catch the concepts. THANK YOU!
Thanks that’s very kind of you!!
Helping all of the debate lords out here Michael, THANK YOU!!
This was very helpful, thank you for making it public! I'm doing a systematic review for my bachelor dissertation (and have never done one before). I was very overwhelmed, but this gave me a direction and the confidence to start :)
Helping PhD Students around the world! Thanks, Michael :)
Amazing. Precise and crisp!! Thank you.
I am doing my first meta-analysis paper and the lecture is a nice guide for me. Well done. Thanks a lot
How is the meta analysis comming up?
It's really helpful to start systematic review and meta-analysis. Thank you so much for making the topic that much easy.
my pleasure!
It is a great lecture! The way you organised is just perfect
It’s very informative and practical lecture. Thank you!
These are awesome lectures. As a commoner not from a medical background yet I can easily understand your presentation. You are certainly a good doctor because you are sincere in delivering your lectures, your study flaws is the best point highlighted here. Thank you very much dr. Michael.
thank you
This is much helpful and helped me a lot in understanding the key concepts.
This was a great lecture! Thanks heaps Michael
crystal clear, easily understood the concept
Thank you Dr.F! This has been enlightening and has helped me tremendously in understanding the fundamentals ❤
My pleasure
thank you dr frallick, for giving such a friendly overview of a seemingly impossible project
Glad it was helpful!
I find this presentation so helpful and up to the standard.
thank you. that is great to hear!
Michael, I feel like I was really in your class. I could have you as my mentor. I enjoyed every bit of your lecture, and I would be using some of your engagement styles and sense of humor while teaching my students. Thank you for a great lecture.
Wow, thank you!
Great lecture , thanks a lot . 😊😊😊
Thank you for this lecture it is really helpful
Thank you for uploading
Super helpful! Thanks
Great lecture....
amazing! thanks a lot.
Very informative and very simle version of a topic too often made complex
Really great. Thanks man
thank you so much
this is really useful
Thank you
Hello, master's and PhD students around the world!! I'll be creating my first meta-analysis for my master's thesis and here is where I end up. Hehehe. Also, Thank you Mr. Fralick, this video is extremely helpful.
my pleasure. i'm happy you enjoyed it!
Thank you from HongKong
Thanks a lot
This video was really helpful
Wow! This is helpful for beginners like me. Thank you.
Glad it was helpful!
Thank you so much. This is informative.
Glad it was helpful!
THANK YOU SO MUCH
My pleasure. I’m happy you enjoyed it
Great lecture Michael!
can anyone help me understand how to use the Newcastle Ottawa scale a little better? The questionnaire seems pretty straightforward but I'm not sure if I am interpreting it correctly.
Thanks man! Getting my phd and that's what I needed! :)
Glad I could help!
@Michael Fralick.. If your institution doesn't provide access to a SR or MA platform like covidence or the others mentioned in this video, can you still conduct your SR just using endnote, excel, word, and a browser? How do you organize the information? Thanks
Thank you so much. Plz make more videos especially about meta-analysis
Thank you for your kind words!!
thank you sir. it was very informative and explained in easy understandable language. im from india, doing my postgraduation in pharmacology.
thank you. i'm happy you found this informative!
I would like to work with you sir. Only to learn.
This was extremely helpful Michael! Thanks so much! May I clarify what is meant by wrong publication type, exposure and back ground article and why they were excluded in your example (18:47)? This will be extremely helpful to me as I am new to systematic review and metaanalysis!
good question. An example of "wrong publication type" would be something like it was an editorial, or a review article. "Exposure" is a bit more confusing. i have a video on "everything you need to know about epidemiology" - 5min mark: ua-cam.com/video/m-CB_grj_FM/v-deo.html&ab_channel=MichaelFralick
Hi, Michael！Thanks for your video, it's really helpful to me :) I have a question regarding the exclusion criteria, what's the reason for excluding studies that have no comparative groups? I am doing study research in sports medicine, but I found out that most of the retrospective cohort studies often have no control groups...
good question. without a comparison group you cannot calculate a relative risk (eg, odds ratio, risk ratio) and the goal of our study was to compare concussion to those without. If your studies have no control group than you would simply be doing a systematic review which is totally A-OK
A really helpful video!
Thank you!!
Siddaway, A. P., Wood, A. M., & Hedges, L. V. (2019). How to do a systematic review: A best practice guide to conducting and reporting narrative reviews, meta-analyses, and meta-syntheses. Annual Review of Psychology, 70, 747-770.
Thanks for this useful video. I wonder how we can refer to this lecture in our paper? Have you written/published what you are teaching here?
Thank you Hamed. I'm happy to hear you enjoyed it. You can cite this paper here: pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30419085/
Very helpful im doing my first systematic review 🤞
Glad it was helpful!
Hey Micheal, thanks for the video.
I had a small request, would you mind giving the link to the "physician burnout" meta-analysis that you said was your template for meta-analysis? Thanks!
i just learned the article is no longer available. here is another one that i think is a good example onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/rth2.12638
31:21 Fixed vs random effects, nice explanation
Thank you
Thank you very much for this lecture - I have one question. Only one of my included studies (out of 9) featured a control group - is there any way I can do a meta-analysis? Many thanks.
unlikely as you typically needed at least two studies. you can still publish what you found and simply note it is a systematic review
Thanks a lot, Michael! This was very helpful. Just one doubt-you mention 'performing systematic analyses,' however I think you did not talk about it in the video or probably I missed out on it? But maybe if you could give very briefly mention a way of doing that?
Thanks again! Really appreciate your lecture on SR and MA.
hi there, the first half of the talk was all on systematic review.
@@Fralickmike Oh okay! thank you, I thought that systematic 'analyses' is not the same as 'systematic 'review'. Thank you for clarification though! Really appreciate it!
Do you have to register your review in advance? Or is this for and in adherence to open science protocols, which aren't necessarily compulsory?
good question. ideally it should be registered before you publish. sometimes you register before you start but sometimes you register part way through. Is it compulsory? nope. but it might be harder to get your article published. note that in the world of randomized clinical trials you MUST register beforehand. otherwise it won't get published!
Superb!!!!
Thanks a lot
Hi Dr. Fralick, thank you for this video. Is there a rapid way to remove duplicates from the whole sample of selected articles?
Yes! The program COVIDENCE does this
Hi sir, I am currently working on a meta-analysis. I have a question to ask regarding continuous variables, when comparing pretest and posttest changes between intervention and control group for example BP, how do I perform the comparison using Revman?
if you have the differences between the two continuous variables you could use that difference as the continuous outcome and meta-analyze it. If it gets fancier, RevMan won't be of use and you'll need to use R or Stata
Hi, Michael！Thanks very much for your wonderful video, it's really helpful to me! I have a question about the review topic. If there are no obvious inconsistent results among studies on a topic (but this is a relatively new topic, there are only 3-5 studies on each outcome of my interest), is it OK to do a systematic review on this topic? Super thanks!
Yes you can!
@@Fralickmike Many thanks！
Hello sir, currently I am working on a meta analysis by using STATA, but I am not able to produce subgroup analysis of Insertion vs Deletion allele contrast. Otherwise all are done but stuck with Allele contrast "I vs D". Please help me out on this. Thanks.
sorry i have not used STATA in a long time
I have a question, i'm sorry if it sounds silly but i'm curious, what sampling technique does systematic review use? Not the sample criteria but the systematic review itself, does it has its own technique or it use randomized or non or what is it? Thank you
Not a dumb question! For some meta analysis you may want to only focus on randomized trials. It all depends on what your research question is. For example if you’re doing a meta analysis on steroids for COVID19. You’d want to just include randomized trials.
@@Fralickmike thankyou :)
Nice presentation
Thanks a lot
Hi! Could you please guide me regarding my systematic review?
Hi Michael, could you suggest the best quality assessment tool for NRSI studies?
what does NRSI stand for???
@@Fralickmike NRSI means the non-randomised study of interventions. Here is more about NRSI training.cochrane.org/handbook/current/chapter-24
@@laxmanbisht2638 not sure there is a "Best" tool. some people like the ROBBINS tool, but i find it is very time consuming so sometimes i use Ottawa Newcastle scale. and sometimes i don't use any tool :)
How do I find a collaborator when no one is interested in partnering with my research?
Dear Sir, Please suggest -- Is it good if we have found out only 50 articles common in both scopus(200 articles) and proquest database(325 articles)? Can we conclude that we have used the right search terms and filters (since the common articles are less so I'm just confused)?
sorry but that is not enough information to know if the search terms were correct
@@Fralickmike Thank you so much Sir for the kind concern. Problem got resolved.
could you share the powerpoint?
Can you use a thematic analysis in a systematic review?
what do you mean?
This lecture coul even solve a particular question... kept rigmaroles coming...
covidence is not free anymore !!! But thank you so much for such an amazing lecture !!
well that sucks! thank you for letting me know, Ali. Some universities provide "free" access