Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Surgeon’s Guide to Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Evidence-Based Surgery

Abstract

High-quality systematic reviews and meta-analyses represent the top of the level of evidence hierarchy. They offer an efficient way to digest and summarize the body of available literature to facilitate up-to-date, evidence-based clinical practice. This chapter offers surgeons the technique to critically appraise systematic reviews and meta-analyses while providing a sample clinical scenario and research article to work through. Three questions are used to guide surgeons with this appraisal : (1) Are the results valid? (2) What are the results? and (3) Can I apply the results to my patients?

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 89.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Bhandari M, Devereaux PJ, Montori V, Cinà C, Tandan V, Guyatt GH, et al. Users’ guide to the surgical literature: how to use a systematic literature review and meta-analysis. Can J Surg. 2004;47(1):60–7.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Haines T, McKnight L, Duku E, Perry L, Thoma A. The role of systematic reviews in clinical research and practice. Clin Plast Surg. 2008;35(2):207–14.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Kelley BP, Chung KC. Developing, conducting, and publishing appropriate systematic review and meta-analysis articles. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2018;141(2):516–25.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Begg CB, Mazumdar M. Operating characteristics of a rank correlation test for publication bias. Biometrics. 1994;50(4):1088–101.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Fleming TR, DeMets DL. Surrogate end points in clinical trials: are we being misled? Ann Intern Med. 1996;125(7):605–13.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Guyatt G, Rennie D, Meade M, Cook D, editors. Users’ guides to the medical literature: a manual for evidence-based clinical practice, vol. 706. Chicago, Illinois: McGraw-Hill Education.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Samargandi OA, Hasan H, Thoma A. Methodologic quality of systematic reviews published in the plastic and reconstructive surgery literature: a systematic review. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2016;137(1):225e–36e.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Sprague S, McKay P, Thoma A. Study design and hierarchy of evidence for surgical decision making. Clin Plast Surg. 2008;35(2):195–205.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Egger M, Smith GD, Sterne JA. Uses and abuses of meta-analysis. Clin Med. 2001;1(6):478–84.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Petrisor BA, Bhandari M. The hierarchy of evidence: levels and grades of recommendation. Indian J Orthop. 2007;41(1):11–5.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Majeed H. Non-operative treatment versus percutaneous fixation for minimally displaced scaphoid waist fractures in high demand young manual workers. J Orthop Traumatol. 2014;15(4):239–44.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Alnaeem H, Aldekhayel S, Kanevsky J, Neel OF. A systematic review and meta-analysis examining the differences between nonsurgical management and percutaneous fixation of minimally and nondisplaced scaphoid fractures. J Hand Surg. 2016;41(12):1135–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Thoma A, Eaves FF III. What is wrong with systematic reviews and meta-analyses: if you want the right answer, ask the right question! Aesthetic Surg J. 2016;36(10):1198–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Thoma A, McKnight L, McKay P, Haines T. Forming the research question. Clin Plast Surg. 2008;35(2):189–93.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Waltho D, Kaur MN, Haynes RB, Farrokhyar F, Thoma A. Users’ guide to the surgical literature: how to perform a high-quality literature search. Can J Surg. 2015;58(5):349–58.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Zlowodzki M, Poolman RW, Kerkhoffs GM, Tornetta P III, Bhandari M, International Evidence-Based Orthopedic Surgery Working Group. How to interpret a meta-analysis and judge its value as a guide for clinical practice. Acta Orthop. 2007;78(5):598–609.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Lane D, Dykeman J, Ferri M, Goldsmith C, Stelfox H. Capture-mark-recapture as a tool for estimating the number of articles available for systematic reviews in critical care medicine. J Crit Care. 2013;28(4):469–75.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Montori V, Smieja M, Guyatt G. Publication bias: a brief review for clinicians. Mayo Clin Proc. 2007;75(12):1284–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Cook DJ, Guyatt GH, Ryan G, Clifton J, Buckingham L, Willan A, et al. Should unpublished data be included in meta-analyses? Current convictions and controversies. JAMA. 1993;269(21):2749–53.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Montori VM, Swiontkowski MF, Cook DJ. Methodologic issues in systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2003;413:43–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Tseng TY, Dahm P, Poolman RW, Preminger GM, Canales BJ, Montori VM. How to use a systematic literature review and meta-analysis. J Urol. 2008;180(4):1249–56.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Booth A, Clarke M, Dooley G, Ghersi D, Moher D, Petticrew M, et al. PROSPERO at one year: an evaluation of its utility. Syst Rev. 2013;2(1):1–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman D. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med. 2009;6(7):e1000097.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Jadad A, Moore R, Carroll D, Jenkinson C, Reynolds D, Gavaghan D, et al. Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary? Control Clin Trials. 1996;17(1):1–12.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Slim K, Nini E, Forestier D, Kwiatkowski F, Panis Y, Chipponi J. Methodological index for non-randomized studies (MINORS): development and validation of a new instrument. ANZ J Surg. 2003;73(9):712–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Voineskos SH, Coroneos CJ, Ziolkowski NI, Kaur MN, Banfield L, Meade MO, et al. A systematic review of surgical randomized controlled trials: part I. Risk of bias and outcomes common pitfalls plastic surgeons can overcome. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2016;137(2):696–706.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Higgins JP, Green S, editors. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions (version 5.1. 0). London, UK: The Cochrane Collaboration; 2016.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Jüni P, Altman DG, Egger M. Assessing the quality of controlled clinical trials. BMJ. 2001;323(7303):42–6.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Jüni P, Witschi A, Bloch R, Egger M. The hazards of scoring the quality of clinical trials for meta-analysis. JAMA. 1999;282(11):1054–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Moher D, Jadad AR, Nichol G, Penman M, Tugwell P, Walsh S. Assessing the quality of randomized controlled trials: an annotated bibliography of scales and checklists. Control Clin Trials. 1995;16(1):62–73.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, Mulrow C, Gøtzsche PC, Ioannidis JP, et al. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. PLoS Med. 2009;6(7):e1000100.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Higgins JP, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, Altman DG. Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ. 2003;327(7414):557.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Ried K. Interpreting and understanding meta-analysis graphs: a practical guide. Aust Fam Physician. 2006;35(8):635–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Evaniew N, van der Watt L, Bhandari M, Ghert M, Aleem I, Drew B, et al. Strategies to improve the credibility of meta-analyses in spine surgery: a systematic survey. Spine J. 2015;15(9):2066–76.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Gallo L, Eskicioglu C, Braga LH, Farrokhyar F, Thoma A. Users’ guide to the surgical literature: how to assess an article using surrogate end points. Can J Surg. 2017;60(4):280.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Prinsen CA, Vohra S, Rose MR, King-Jones S, Ishaque S, Bhaloo Z, et al. Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) initiative: protocol for an international Delphi study to achieve consensus on how to select outcome measurement instruments for outcomes included in a ‘core outcome set’. Trials. 2014;15(1):247.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Potter S, Holcombe C, Ward JA, Blazeby JM, BRAVO Steering Group. Development of a core outcome set for research and audit studies in reconstructive breast surgery. Br J Surg. 2015;102(11):1360–71.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement [Internet]. Equator-network.org. 2018 [cited 2018 Sep 10]. Available from: http://www.equator-network.org/reporting-guidelines/prisma/.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada

    Andrea Copeland & Lucas Gallo

  2. Department of Orthopedics, Division of Hand and Microvascular Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA

    Noor Alolabi

Authors
  1. Andrea Copeland
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Lucas Gallo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Noor Alolabi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andrea Copeland .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Division of Plastic Surgery, Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact (HEI), McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada

    Achilles Thoma

  2. Department of Surgery, Division of Orthopaedic Surgery, Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact (HEI), McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada

    Sheila Sprague

  3. Department of Surgery, Division of Plastic Surgery, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada

    Sophocles H. Voineskos

  4. Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact (HEI), McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada

    Charles H. Goldsmith

Appendices

Appendix 1: Search Results

  1. 1.

    Arora R, Gschwentner M, Krappinger D, Lutz M, Blauth M, Gabl M. Fixation of nondisplaced scaphoid fractures: making treatment cost effective. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2006;127(1):39–46.

  2. 2.

    Schernberg F. Recent scaphoid fractures (within the first three weeks). Chir Main. 2005;24(3, 4):117–31.

  3. 3.

    Geurts G, Van Riet R, Meermans G, Verstreken F. Volar percutaneous transtrapezial fixation of scaphoid waist fractures: surgical technique. Acta Orthop Belg. 2012;78(1):121–5.

  4. 4.

    Majeed H. Non-operative treatment versus percutaneous fixation for minimally displaced scaphoid waist fractures in high demand young manual workers. J Orthop Traumatol. 2014;15(4):239–44.

  5. 5.

    Alnaeem H, Aldekhayel S, Kanevsky J, Neel O. A systematic review and meta-analysis examining the differences between nonsurgical management and percutaneous fixation of minimally and nondisplaced scaphoid fractures. J Hand Surg. 2016;41(12):1135–44.

  6. 6.

    Drexier M, Haim A, Pritsch T, Rosenblatt Y. Isolated fractures of the scaphoid: classification, treatment and outcome. Harefuah. 2011;150(1):50–5.

  7. 7.

    Bond C, Shin A, McBride M, Dao K. Percutaneous screw fixation or cast immobilization for nondisplaced scaphoid fractures. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2001;83(4):483–8.

  8. 8.

    Schädel-Höpfner M, Marent-Huber M, Sauerbier M, Pillukat T, Eisenschenk A, Siebert H. Operative versus conservative treatment of non-displaced fractures of the scaphoid bone. Results of a controlled multicenter cohort study. Unfallchirurg. 2010;113(10):804–13.

  9. 9.

    Fowler J, Ilyas A. Headless compression screw fixation of scaphoid fractures. Hand Clin. 2010;26(3):351–61.

  10. 10.

    Yinusa W, Adetan O, Odatuwa-Omagbemi D, Eyo M. Bilateral simultaneous fracture of the carpal scaphoid successfully treated with conservative cast immobilisation: a case report. West Afr J Med. 2010;29(6):425–8.

  11. 11.

    Haddad F, Goddard N. Acute percutaneous scaphoid fixation: a pilot study. J Bone Joint Surg. 1998;80(1):95–9.

  12. 12.

    Soubeyrand M, Even J, Mansour C, Gagey O, Molina V, Biau D. Cadaveric assessment of a new guidewire insertion device for volar percutaneous fixation of nondisplaced scaphoid fracture. Injury. 2009;40(6):645–51.

  13. 13.

    Noaman H, Shiha A, Ibrahim A. Functional outcomes of nonunion scaphoid fracture treated by pronator quadratus pedicled bone graft. Ann Plast Surg. 2011;66(1):47–52.

  14. 14.

    McQueen M, Gelbke M, Wakefield A, Will E, Gaebler C. Percutaneous screw fixation versus conservative treatment for fractures of the waist of the scaphoid. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2008;90(1):66–71.

  15. 15.

    Yin Z, Zhang J, Kan S, Wang P. Treatment of acute scaphoid fractures. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2007;460(1):142–51.

Appendix 2: Prisma Flow Diagram [23, 38]

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Copeland, A., Gallo, L., Alolabi, N. (2019). The Surgeon’s Guide to Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. In: Thoma, A., Sprague, S., Voineskos, S., Goldsmith, C. (eds) Evidence-Based Surgery. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-05120-4_15

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-05120-4_15

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-05119-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-05120-4

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation