Learning Outcomes
Upon completion of the course, students will know the basic principles of systematic reviews and meta-analyses, and will have gained the experience of a systematic review, on an own research question. Students will discuss and work on their own question with their colleagues, will go through all stages of a systematic review, they will reflect on and understand all the decisions one needs to take one during a review.
Knowledge
Upon successfully completing this course, students will be familiar with:
• The basic principles of systematic reviews and meta-analyses
• The stages from start through completion of a systematic review
• The process and existing repositories for publication of systematic reviews protocol
• The basic principles of overview of systematic reviews
• Reporting guidelines for systematic reviews and overview of systematic reviews
Capacities
The course participants upon completion will be able to:
• Formulate a clear research question, in a format that can be answered (PICO)
• Formulate a search strategy
• Devise a statistical analysis plan
• Facilitate a search
• Hold literature cleanup and disposal of non-eligible studies
• Perform statistical analysis
• Assess and handle heterogeneity
• Assess the risk of bias
• Integrate risk assessment bias in their results
• Assess quality of their conclusions
Course Content (Syllabus)
1. Formulate a research question that can be answered
2. Describe the study selection criteria
3. Develop a search strategy
4. Develop a data extraction form
5. Develop an analysis plan
6. Devise a strategy for assessing the quality of studies
7. Hold a systematic review or an overview of systematic reviews
8. Hold the meta-analysis
Keywords
Overview of systematic reviews, systematic review, meta-analysis, heterogeneity
Additional bibliography for study
Balduzzi, Sara, Gerta Rücker, and Guido Schwarzer. "How to perform a meta-analysis
with R: a practical tutorial." Evidence-based mental health 22.4 (2019): 153-160.
Chaimani, Anna, et al. "Common pitfalls and mistakes in the set-up, analysis and
interpretation of results in network meta-analysis: what clinicians should look for in a
published article." Evidence-based mental health 20.3 (2017): 88-94.
Mavridis, Dimitris, et al. "A primer on network meta-analysis with emphasis on mental
health." Evidence-based mental health 18.2 (2015): 40-46.
Nikolakopoulou, Adriani, Dimitris Mavridis, and Georgia Salanti. "Demystifying fixed
and random effects meta-analysis." Evidence-based mental health 17.2 (2014): 53-57.
Mavridis, Dimitris, and Georgia Salanti. "Exploring and accounting for publication bias
in mental health: a brief overview of methods." Evidence-based mental health 17.1
(2014): 11-15.
Salanti, Georgia. "Indirect and mixed‐treatment comparison, network, or multiple‐
treatments meta‐analysis: many names, many benefits, many concerns for the next
generation evidence synthesis tool." Research synthesis methods 3.2 (2012): 80-97.
Thompson, Simon G., and Julian PT Higgins. "How should meta‐regression analyses be
undertaken and interpreted?." Statistics in medicine 21.11 (2002): 1559-1573.
Borenstein, Michael, et al. "A basic introduction to fixed‐effect and random‐effects
models for meta‐analysis." Research synthesis methods 1.2 (2010): 97-111.