Can I read Reported Methodologic Quality and Discrepancies between Large and Small Randomized Trials in Meta-Analyses on EtoBox?

Reported Methodologic Quality and Discrepancies between Large and Small Randomized Trials in Meta-Analyses by Lise L. Kjaergard; John Villumsen; Christian Gluud is a Medicine article available to read on EtoBox.

What is Reported Methodologic Quality and Discrepancies between Large and Small Randomized Trials in Meta-Analyses about?

## Purpose: To explore whether reported methodologic quality affects estimated intervention effects in randomized trials and contributes to discrepancies between the results of large randomized trials and small randomized trials in meta-analyses. ## Data sources: Meta-analyses of randomized trials that included at least one large trial (>/=1000 participants) were included, regardless of the therapeutic area. eligible meta-analyses were identified through electronic searches and bibliographies of relevant articles. ## Study selection: Full-length randomized trials. ## Data extraction: Methodologic quality was assessed according to reported randomization, double blinding, and follow-up as separate components and by using the jadad composite scale. ## Data synthesis: Fourteen meta-analyses involving 190 randomized trials from eight therapeutic areas were included. compared with large trials, intervention effects were exaggerated in small trials with inadequate allocation sequence generation (ratio of odds ratios, 0.46 [95% ci, 0.25 to 0.83]; p = 0.011), inadequate allocation concealment (ratio of odds ratios, 0.49 [ci, 0.27 to 0.86]; p = 0.014), and no double blinding (ratio of odds r

Who reads Reported Methodologic Quality and Discrepancies between Large and Small Randomized Trials in Meta-Analyses?

Author

Lise L. Kjaergard; John Villumsen; Christian Gluud

Publisher

American College of Physicians

Published

2001

Language

EN

Field

Medicine (Health Sciences)