FREE NEJM E-TOC    HOME   |   SUBSCRIBE   |   CURRENT ISSUE   |   PAST ISSUES   |   COLLECTIONS   |   Search Term  Advanced Search

Sign in | Get NEJM's E-Mail Table of Contents — Free | Subscribe

Previous Volume 341:131 July 8, 1999 Number 2 Next

	Since this article has no abstract, we have provided an extract of the first 100 words of the full text and any section headings.

	Full Text Purchase this article Add to Personal Archive Add to Citation Manager Notify a Friend E-mail When Cited Related Article Related Article by LeLorier, J. PubMed Citation

To the Editor: The report by LeLorier et al. (Aug. 21, 1997, issue) indicated that the results of meta-analyses frequently conflict with those of large randomized, controlled trials.¹ An editorial suggested that some of these discrepancies may arise when investigators, editors, and reviewers do not undertake rigorous technical reviews of the data from the studies combined in the meta-analyses.²

Meta-analyses often examine false positive rates — which would be calculated as b÷(b+d) in Figure 1 — because these rates permit data from different studies to be combined even if the data were obtained with the use of different criteria for . . . [Full Text of this Article]

References

HOME  |  SUBSCRIBE  |  SEARCH  |  CURRENT ISSUE  |  PAST ISSUES  |  COLLECTIONS  |  PRIVACY  |  TERMS OF USE  |  HELP  |  beta.nejm.org Comments and questions? Please contact us. The New England Journal of Medicine is owned, published, and copyrighted © 2009 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.