Roger Chou, MD: How the AHRQ creates and grades a meta-analysis
Produced and interviewed by Steven Greer, MD
A meta-analysis is the most influential form of systematic review now, but are all meta-analysis worthy of the highest level of quality in the hierarchy of the AHRQ? Are some meta-analyses “garbage in, garbage out”? Are there standardized, widely accepted, methods for going about a meta-analysis, or are the drug and device industries manipulating this process to create marketing junk science? Are academic doctors doing more meta-analyses because they end up being referenced by more journals and boost their CV?
In Part 1, Dr. Roger Chou of Oregon, a researcher for the AHRQ via a contracted Evidence-based Practice Center, and also a contributor to the U.S. Preventive Services task Force, discusses the rulebooks used by the AHRQ to go about systematic reviews of medical literature.
In Part 2, Dr. Chou discusses how they spot a bad meta-analysis and exclude it from their systematic reviews. He lists as a specific example of a sloppy meta-analysis.
AHRQ, Biostatistics, Oregon H&S Univ, Policy | apples49 | 
January 4, 2012 10:06 am
No Comments
No comments yet.
Notice: comments_rss_link is deprecated since version 2.5! Use post_comments_feed_link() instead. in /data/30/1/121/80/1121895/user/1185656/htdocs/wordpress/wp-includes/functions.php on line 3406
RSS feed for comments on this post.
TrackBack URI
