Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2018 May 21;18(1):44.
doi: 10.1186/s12874-018-0495-9.

Methods to systematically review and meta-analyse observational studies: a systematic scoping review of recommendations

Monika Mueller  1   2 , Maddalena D'Addario  2 , Matthias Egger  1 , Myriam Cevallos  3 , Olaf Dekkers  4   5 , Catrina Mugglin  1 , Pippa Scott  6
Affiliations

Methods to systematically review and meta-analyse observational studies: a systematic scoping review of recommendations

Monika Mueller et al. BMC Med Res Methodol. .

Abstract

Background: Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of observational studies are frequently performed, but no widely accepted guidance is available at present. We performed a systematic scoping review of published methodological recommendations on how to systematically review and meta-analyse observational studies.

Methods: We searched online databases and websites and contacted experts in the field to locate potentially eligible articles. We included articles that provided any type of recommendation on how to conduct systematic reviews and meta-analyses of observational studies. We extracted and summarised recommendations on pre-defined key items: protocol development, research question, search strategy, study eligibility, data extraction, dealing with different study designs, risk of bias assessment, publication bias, heterogeneity, statistical analysis. We summarised recommendations by key item, identifying areas of agreement and disagreement as well as areas where recommendations were missing or scarce.

Results: The searches identified 2461 articles of which 93 were eligible. Many recommendations for reviews and meta-analyses of observational studies were transferred from guidance developed for reviews and meta-analyses of RCTs. Although there was substantial agreement in some methodological areas there was also considerable disagreement on how evidence synthesis of observational studies should be conducted. Conflicting recommendations were seen on topics such as the inclusion of different study designs in systematic reviews and meta-analyses, the use of quality scales to assess the risk of bias, and the choice of model (e.g. fixed vs. random effects) for meta-analysis.

Conclusion: There is a need for sound methodological guidance on how to conduct systematic reviews and meta-analyses of observational studies, which critically considers areas in which there are conflicting recommendations.

Keywords: Meta-analysis; Methods; Observational studies; Recommendation; Systematic review.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Flow chart of article selection
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Black N. Why we need observational studies to evaluate the effectiveness of health care. BMJ. 1996;312:1215–1218. doi: 10.1136/bmj.312.7040.1215. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Funai EF, Rosenbush EJ, Lee MJ, Del Priore G. Distribution of study designs in four major US journals of obstetrics and gynecology. Gynecol Obstet Investig. 2001;51:8–11. doi: 10.1159/000052882. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Scales CD, Norris RD, Peterson BL, Preminger GM, Dahm P. Clinical research and statistical methods in the urology literature. J Urol. 2005;174(4 Pt 1):1374–1379. doi: 10.1097/01.ju.0000173640.91654.b5. - DOI - PubMed
    1. The Framingham Heart Study. https://www.framinghamheartstudy.org. Accessed 20 Jun 2017.
    1. The National Child Development Study. http://www.cls.ioe.ac.uk. Accessed 20 Jun 2017.

Publication types