SpringerLink
Log in

Evidence-Informed Public Health, Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Modern Biostatistical Methods for Evidence-Based Global Health Research

Part of the book series: Emerging Topics in Statistics and Biostatistics ((ETSB))

  • 515 Accesses

Abstract

Public health practitioners need to make decisions on the health and well-being of a population on a daily basis. They are faced with numerous questions such as the burden of disease in a community, the risks for develo** a disease or the effectiveness of interventions to prevent a disease. While the answers to some of these questions might be evident, others might not and require critical thinking and careful consideration of existing research, input from various stakeholders and experts on the topic, characteristics and values of a population as well as various other economic and social factors. This process of decision-making is referred to as evidence-based public health (EBPH). EBPH has been defined as the ‘conscientious, explicit and judicious use of current best evidence in making decisions about the care of communities and populations in the domain of health protection, disease prevention, health maintenance and improvement’ (Jenicek, 1997), and the process has similarly been described as ‘integrating the best available evidence with the knowledge and considered judgements from stakeholders and experts to benefit the needs of a population’ by the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDPC, 2011). EBPH mirrors the principles of evidence-based healthcare (Dawes et al., 2005) and involves (1) phrasing clear questions related to a public health problem; (2) searching for best evidence to answer this question; (3) critically appraising the evidence for validity and interpreting the results; (4) considering applicability of the evidence and implementing the evidence in public health policy and practice; and (5) evaluating the process of EBPH as well as the newly implemented policies and programmes. This five-step process facilitates a systematic approach to the decision-making process.

Evidence-based public health (EBPH) ensures that decisions about the health of a population are informed by the best available research evidence, taking into account the expertise of public health practitioners as well other factors linked to the characteristics and the context of the population. Systematic reviews are essential for EBPH decision-making, as they are designed to present the available evidence in a holistic, transparent and systematic way. In this chapter, we explain what systematic reviews are; the process of meta-analysis and its use in systematic reviews of interventions; the use of meta-analyses in systematic reviews of diagnostic test-accuracy studies; network meta-analysis and how to synthesise results when meta-analysis is not possible. We also provide a short overview of assessing the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach; and a table of useful resources.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 149.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 189.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free ship** worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free ship** worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alonso-Coello, P., Schünemann, H. J., Moberg, J., Brignardello-Petersen, R., Akl, E. A., Davoli, M., Treweek, S., Mustafa, R. A., Rada, G., Rosenbaum, S., Morelli, A., Guyatt, G. H., & Oxman, A. D. (2018). GRADE Evidence to Decision (EtD) frameworks: a systematic and transparent approach to making well informed healthcare choices. 1: Introduction. Gaceta Sanitaria, 32(2), 166.e161–166.e110.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andrews, J., Guyatt, G., Oxman, A. D., Alderson, P., Dahm, P., Falck-ytter, Y., Nasser, M., Meerpohl, J., Post, P. N., & Kunz, R. (2013a). GRADE SERIES GRADE guidelines: 14. Going from evidence to recommendations: the significance and presentation of recommendations. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 66, 719–725.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andrews, J. C., Sch, H. J., Oxman, A. D., Pottie, K., Meerpohl, J. J., Alonso, P., Rind, D., Montori, V. M., Pablo, J., Norris, S., Elbarbary, M., Post, P., Nasser, M., Shukla, V., Jaeschke, R., Brozek, J., Djulbegovic, B., & Guyatt, G. (2013b). GRADE guidelines: 15. Going from evidence to recommendation d determinants of a recommendation ’ s direction and strength. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 66, 726–735.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Balshem, H., Helfand, M., Schünemann, H. J., Oxman, A. D., Kunz, R., Brozek, J., Vist, G. E., Falck-Ytter, Y., Meerpohl, J., Norris, S., & Guyatt, G. H. (2011). GRADE guidelines: 3. Rating the quality of evidence. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 64(4), 401–406.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P., & Rothstein, H. R. (2010). A basic introduction to fixed-effect and random-effects models for meta-analysis. Research Synthesis Methods, 1(2), 97–111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brignardello-Petersen, R., Bonner, A., Alexander, P. E., Siemieniuk, R. A., Furukawa, T. A., Rochwerg, B., Hazlewood, G. S., Alhazzani, W., Mustafa, R. A., Murad, M. H., Puhan, M. A., Schünemann, H. J., & Guyatt, G. H. (2018). Advances in the GRADE approach to rate the certainty in estimates from a network meta-analysis. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 93, 36–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Broazek, J. L., Akl, E. A., Compalati, E., Kreis, J., Terracciano, L., Fiocchi, A., Ueffing, E., Andrews, J., Alonso-Coello, P., Meerpohl, J. J., Lang, D. M., Jaeschke, R., Williams, J. W., Phillips, B., Lethaby, A., Bossuyt, P., Glasziou, P., Helfand, M., Watine, J., Afilalo, M., Welch, V., Montedori, A., Abraha, I., Horvath, A. R., Bousquet, J., Guyatt, G. H., & Schünemann, H. J. (2011). Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations in clinical practice guidelines part 3 of 3. The GRADE approach to develo** recommendations. Allergy: European Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, 66(5), 588–595.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brownson, R. C., Gurney, J. G., & Land, G. H. (1999). Evidence-based decision making in public health. Journal of Public Health Management and Practice, 5(5), 86–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brozek, J. L., Akl, E. A., Jaeschke, R., Lang, D. M., Bossuyt, P., Glasziou, P., Helfand, M., Ueffing, E., Alonso-Coello, P., Meerpohl, J., Phillips, B., Horvath, A. R., Bousquet, J., Guyatt, G. H., & Schünemann, H. J. (2009). Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations in clinical practice guidelines: Part 2 of 3. The GRADE approach to grading quality of evidence about diagnostic tests and strategies. Allergy: European Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, 64(8), 1109–1116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bucher, H. C., Guyatt, G. H., Griffith, L. E., & Walter, S. D. (1997). The results of direct and indirect treatment comparisons in meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 50(6), 683–691.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, M., McKenzie, J. E., Sowden, A., Katikireddi, S. V., Brennan, S. E., Ellis, S., Hartmann-Boyce, J., Ryan, R., Shepperd, S., & Thomas, J. (2020). Synthesis without meta-analysis (SWiM) in systematic reviews: Reporting guideline. BMJ, 368.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chaimani, A., Caldwell, D. M., Li, T., Higgins, J. P. T., & Salanti, G. (2019). Chapter 11: Undertaking network meta-analyses. Cochrane.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chinnock, P., Siegfried, N., & Clarke, M. (2005). Is evidence-based medicine relevant to the develo** world? PLoS Medicine, 2(5), e107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chu, H., Nie, L., Cole, S. R., & Poole, C. (2009). Meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy studies accounting for disease prevalence: Alternative parameterizations and model selection. Statistics in Medicine, 28(18), 2384–2399.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, N. J., Sutton, A. J., Morris, D., Ades, A. E., & Welton, N. J. (2009). Addressing between-study heterogeneity and inconsistency in mixed treatment comparisons: Application to stroke prevention treatments in individuals with non-rheumatic atrial fibrillation. Statistics in Medicine, 28(March), 1861–1881.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corsi, D. J., & Subramanian, S. (2019). Socioeconomic gradients and distribution of diabetes, hypertension, and obesity in India. JAMA Network Open, 2(4), e190411–e190411.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dawes, M., Summerskill, W., Glasziou, P., Cartabellotta, A., Martin, J., Hopayian, K., Porzsolt, F., Burls, A., Osborne, J., & T. Second International Conference of Evidence-Based Health Care and Developers. (2005). Sicily statement on evidence-based practice. BMC Medical Education, 5(1), 1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Buck, E., Van Remoortel, H., Hannes, K., Govender, T., Naidoo, S., Avau, B., Veegaete, A. V., Musekiwa, A., Lutje, V., Cargo, M., Mosler, H.-J., Vandekerckhove, P., & Young, T. (2017). Approaches to promote handwashing and sanitation behaviour change in low- and middle-income countries: A mixed method systematic review. Campbell Systematic Reviews, 13(1), 1–447.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deeks, J., Higgins, J., & Altman, D. (2008). Analysing data and undertaking meta-analyses, chapter 9. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions version, 510.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deeks, J., Higgins, J., & Altman, D. (2019). Chapter 10: Analysing data and undertaking meta-analyses. In H. JPT, J. Thomas, J. Chandler, M. Cumpston, T. Li, M. J. Page, & V. A. Welch (Eds.), Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions version 6.0 (updated July 2019). Cochrane.

    Google Scholar 

  • DerSimonian, R., & Laird, N. (1986). Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Controlled Clinical Trials, 7(3), 177–188.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dickersin, K., & Berlin, J. A. (1992). Meta-analysis: State-of-the-science. Epidemiologic Reviews, 14(1), 154–176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Donegan, S., Williamson, P., D’Alessandro, U., & Tudur Smith, C. (2013). Assessing key assumptions of network meta-analysis: A review of methods. Research Synthesis Methods, 4(4), 291–323.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ECDPC. (2011). Evidence-based methodologies for public health – How to assess the best available evidence when time is limited and there is lack of sound evidence. Stockholm.

    Google Scholar 

  • Egger, M., Davey-Smith, G., & Altman, D. (2008). Systematic reviews in health care: Meta-analysis in context. Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elliott, W. J., & Meyer, P. M. (2007). Incident diabetes in clinical trials of antihypertensive drugs: A network meta-analysis. The Lancet, 369(9557), 201–207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gadkary, C., Alderson, P., & Signorini, D. F. (2002). Therapeutic hypothermia for head injury. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 1.

    Google Scholar 

  • GRADE Series (2021). From https://www.jclinepi.com/content/jce-GRADE-Series

  • Guyatt, G. H., Oxman, A. D., Vist, G. E., Kunz, R., Falck, Y., Alonso-coello, P., & Schünemann, H. J. (2008). GRADE: An emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. British Medical Journal, 336(April), 924–926.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guyatt, G., Oxman, A., Kunz, R., Woodcock, J., Brozek, J., Helfand, M., Alonso-coello, P., Glasziou, P., Jaeschke, R., Akl, E. A., Norris, S., Vist, G., Dahm, P., Shukla, V. K., & Higgins, J. (2011a). GRADE guidelines: 7. Rating the quality of evidence d inconsistency. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 64, 1294–1302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guyatt, G., Oxman, A. D., Akl, E. A., Kunz, R., Vist, G., Brozek, J., Norris, S., Falck-Ytter, Y., Glasziou, P., Debeer, H., Jaeschke, R., Rind, D., Meerpohl, J., Dahm, P., & Schünemann, H. J. (2011b). GRADE guidelines: 1. Introduction – GRADE evidence profiles and summary of findings tables. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 64(4), 383–394.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guyatt, G. H., Oxman, A. D., Kunz, R., Atkins, D., Brozek, J., Vist, G., Alderson, P., Glasziou, P., Falck-Ytter, Y., & Schünemann, H. J. (2011c). GRADE guidelines: 2. Framing the question and deciding on important outcomes. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 64(4), 395–400.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guyatt, G. H., Oxman, A. D., Kunz, R., Brozek, J., Alonso-Coello, P., Rind, D., Devereaux, P. J., Montori, V. M., Freyschuss, B., Vist, G., Jaeschke, R., Williams, J. W., Murad, M. H., Sinclair, D., Falck-Ytter, Y., Meerpohl, J., Whittington, C., Thorlund, K., Andrews, J., & Schünemann, H. J. (2011d). GRADE guidelines 6. Rating the quality of evidence – imprecision. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 64(12), 1283–1293.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guyatt, G. H., Oxman, A. D., Kunz, R., Woodcock, J., Brozek, J., Helfand, M., Alonso-Coello, P., Falck-Ytter, Y., Jaeschke, R., Vist, G., Akl, E. A., Post, P. N., Norris, S., Meerpohl, J., Shukla, V. K., Nasser, M., & Schünemann, H. J. (2011e). GRADE guidelines: 8. Rating the quality of evidence – indirectness. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 64(12), 1303–1310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guyatt, G. H., Oxman, A. D., Montori, V., Vist, G., Kunz, R., Brozek, J., Alonso-Coello, P., Djulbegovic, B., Atkins, D., Falck-Ytter, Y., Williams, J. W., Meerpohl, J., Norris, S. L., Akl, E. A., & Schünemann, H. J. (2011f). GRADE guidelines: 5. Rating the quality of evidence – publication bias. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 64(12), 1277–1282.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guyatt, G. H., Oxman, A. D., Sultan, S., Glasziou, P., Akl, E. A., Alonso-Coello, P., Atkins, D., Kunz, R., Brozek, J., Montori, V., Jaeschke, R., Rind, D., Dahm, P., Meerpohl, J., Vist, G., Berliner, E., Norris, S., Falck-Ytter, Y., Murad, M. H., & Schünemann, H. J. (2011g). GRADE guidelines: 9. Rating up the quality of evidence. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 64(12), 1311–1316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guyatt, G. H., Oxman, A. D., Vist, G., Kunz, R., Brozek, J., Alonso-Coello, P., Montori, V., Akl, E. A., Djulbegovic, B., Falck-Ytter, Y., Norris, S. L., Williams, J. W., Atkins, D., Meerpohl, J., & Schünemann, H. J. (2011h). GRADE guidelines: 4. Rating the quality of evidence – study limitations (risk of bias). Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 64(4), 407–415.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guyatt, G. H., Oxman, A. D., Santesso, N., Helfand, M., Vist, G., Kunz, R., Brozek, J., Norris, S., Meerpohl, J., Djulbegovic, B., Alonso-Coello, P., Post, P. N., Busse, J. W., Glasziou, P., Christensen, R., & Schünemann, H. J. (2013a). GRADE guidelines: 12. Preparing summary of findings tables – binary outcomes. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 66(2), 158–172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guyatt, G. H., Thorlund, K., Oxman, A. D., Walter, S. D., Patrick, D., Furukawa, T. A., Johnston, B. C., Karanicolas, P., Akl, E. A., Vist, G., Kunz, R., Brozek, J., Kupper, L. L., Martin, S. L., Meerpohl, J. J., Alonso-coello, P., Christensen, R., & Schunemann, H. J. (2013b). GRADE guidelines: 13. Preparing Summary of Findings tables and evidence profiles- continuous outcomes. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 66(2), 173–183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hamza, T. H., Arends, L. R., van Houwelingen, H. C., & Stijnen, T. (2009). Multivariate random effects meta-analysis of diagnostic tests with multiple thresholds. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 9, 73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harrison, S., Jones, H. E., Martin, R. M., Lewis, S. J., & Higgins, J. P. (2017). The albatross plot: A novel graphical tool for presenting results of diversely reported studies in a systematic review. Research Synthesis Methods, 8(3), 281–289.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herbert, R. D., & Kari, B. (2005). Analysis of quality of interventions in systematic reviews. BMJ, 331(7515), 507–509.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Higgins, J. P., & Thompson, S. G. (2002). Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. Statistics in Medicine, 21(11), 1539–1558.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Higgins, J. P., Thompson, S. G., Deeks, J. J., & Altman, D. G. (2003). Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ, 327(7414), 557–560.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Higgins, J. P. T., Thompson, S. G., & Spiegelhalter, D. J. (2009). A re-evaluation of random-effects meta-analysis. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A (Statistics in Society), 172(1), 137–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Higgins, J. P. T., Jackson, D., Barrett, J. K., Lu, G., Ades, A. E., & White, I. R. (2012). Consistency and inconsistency in network meta-analysis: Concepts and models for multi-arm studies. Research Synthesis Methods, 3(2), 98–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Higgins, J., Eldridge, S., & T. Li. (2019a). Chapter 23: Including variants on randomized trials. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions version 6.0 (updated July 2019).

    Google Scholar 

  • Higgins, J., Thomas, J., Chandler, J., Cumpston, M., Li, T., Page, M., & Welch, V. (2019b). Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions version 6.0 (updated July 2019), Cochrane.

    Google Scholar 

  • Higgins, J. P., López-López, J. A., Becker, B. J., Davies, S. R., Dawson, S., Grimshaw, J. M., McGuinness, L. A., Moore, T. H., Rehfuess, E. A., & Thomas, J. (2019c). Synthesising quantitative evidence in systematic reviews of complex health interventions. BMJ Global Health, 4(Suppl 1), e000858.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ioannidis, J. P., & Lau, J. (1999). Pooling research results: Benefits and limitations of meta-analysis. Joint Commission Journal on Quality Improvement, 25(9), 462–469.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ioannidis, J. P., Patsopoulos, N. A., & Rothstein, H. R. (2008). Reasons or excuses for avoiding meta-analysis in forest plots. BMJ, 336(7658), 1413–1415.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Islam, M. Z., Musekiwa, A., Islam, K., Ahmed, S., Chowdhury, S., Ahad, A., & Biswas, P. K. (2014). Regional variation in the prevalence of E. coli O157 in cattle: a meta-analysis and meta-regression. PLoS ONE, 9(4), e93299.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, D., & White, I. R. (2011). Multivariate meta-analysis: Potential and promise. Statistics in Medicine, 20(January), 24812498–24812498.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jenicek, M. (1997). Epidemiology, evidenced-based medicine, and evidence-based public health. Journal of Epidemiology, 7(4), 187–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leeflang, M., Deeks, J., Gatsonis, C., Bossuyt, P., & C. D. T. A. W. Group. (2008). Systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy. Annals of Internal Medicine, 149(12), 889–897.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lengeler, C. (2004). Insecticide-treated bed nets and curtains for preventing malaria. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewin, S., Glenton, C., Munthe-Kaas, H., Carlsen, B., Colvin, C. J., Gülmezoglu, M., Noyes, J., Booth, A., Garside, R., & Rashidian, A. (2015). Using qualitative evidence in decision making for health and social interventions: An approach to assess confidence in findings from qualitative evidence syntheses (GRADE-CERQual). PLoS Medicine, 12(10), e1001895–e1001895.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li, T., Puhan, M. A., Vedula, S. S., Singh, S., Dickersin, K., & T. A. H. N. M.-a. M. M. W. Group. (2011). Network meta-analysis-highly attractive but more methodological research is needed. BMC Medicine, 9(1), 79–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Macaskill, P., Gatsonis, C., Deeks, J., Harbord, R., & Takwoingi, Y. (2010). Chapter 10: Analysing and presenting results; Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy version 1.0. The Cochrane Collaboration

    Google Scholar 

  • Mavridis, D., & Salanti, G. (2011). A practical introduction to multivariate meta-analysis. Statistical Methods in Medical Research, 22(1), 133–158.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mavridis, D., Giannatsi, M., Cipriani, A., & Salanti, G. (2015). A primer on network meta-analysis with emphasis on mental health. Evidence-Based Mental Health, 18(2), 40–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCaul, M., Lourens, A., & Kredo, T. (2014). Pre-hospital versus in-hospital thrombolysis for ST-elevation myocardial infarction. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 9.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGill, R., Tukey, J. W., & Larsen, W. A. (1978). Variations of box plots. The American Statistician, 32(1), 12–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • McKenzie, J. and S. Brennan (2019). Chapter 12: Synthesizing and presenting findings using other methods. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions version 6.0 (updated July 2019).

    Google Scholar 

  • Moher, D., Cook, D. J., Eastwood, S., Olkin, I., Rennie, D., & Stroup, D. F. (1999). Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: The QUOROM statement. Quality of reporting of meta-analyses. Lancet, 354(9193), 1896–1900.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & P. Group. (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 62(10), 1006–1012.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moses, L., Shapiro, D., & Littenberg, B. (1993). Combining independent studies of a diagnostic test into a summary roc curve: Data-analytic approaches and some additional considerations. Statistics in Medicine, 12(14), 1293–1316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mudie, K., **, M. M., Tan, L., Kendall, J., Addo, I., Dos-Santos-Silva, J., Quint, L., Smeeth, S., Cook, D., Nitsch, B., Natamba, F., Gomez-Olive, X., Ako, A., & Perel, P. (2019). Non-communicable diseases in sub-Saharan Africa: A sco** review of large cohort studies. Journal of Global Health, 9(2), 020409.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murdoch, I. E., Morris, S. S., & Cousens, S. N. (1998). People and eyes: Statistical approaches in ophthalmology. British Journal of Ophthalmology, 82(8), 971–973.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murray, D. M. (1998). Design and analysis of group-randomized trials. Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Naaktgeboren, C. A., van Enst, W. A., Ochodo, E. A., de Groot, J. A., Hooft, L., Leeflang, M. M., Bossuyt, P. M., Moons, K. G., & Reitsma, J. B. (2014). Systematic overview finds variation in approaches to investigating and reporting on sources of heterogeneity in systematic reviews of diagnostic studies. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 67(11), 1200–1209.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Naaktgeboren, C. A., Ochodo, E. A., Van Enst, W. A., de Groot, J. A. H., Hooft, L., Leeflang, M. M. G., Bossuyt, P. M., Moons, K. G. M., & Reitsma, J. B. (2016). Assessing variability in results in systematic reviews of diagnostic studies. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 16, 6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Noyes, J., Booth, A., Cargo, M., Flemming, K., Garside, R., Hannes, K., Harden, A., Harris, J., Lewin, S., Pantoja, T., & Thomas, J. (2018). Cochrane qualitative and implementation methods group guidance serier – paper 1: Introduction. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 97, 35–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ochodo, E. A., & Leeflang, M. M. G. (2012). Systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy for evidence-based diagnostic practice in Africa. African Journal of Laboratory Medicine, 1(1), 7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ochodo, E. A., Reitsma, J. B., Bossuyt, P. M., & Leeflang, M. M. (2013). Survey revealed a lack of clarity about recommended methods for meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy data. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 66(11), 1281–1288.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ochodo, E., Gopalakrishna, G., Spek, B., Reitsma, J., van Lieshout, L., Polman, K., Lamberton, P., Bossuyt, P., & Leeflang, M. (2015). Circulating antigen tests and urine reagent strips for diagnosis of active schistosomiasis in endemic areas. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 3, CD009579.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ogilvie, D., Fayter, D., Petticrew, M., Sowden, A., Thomas, S., Whitehead, M., & Worthy, G. (2008). The harvest plot: A method for synthesising evidence about the differential effects of interventions. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 8(1), 8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petropoulou, M., Nikolakopoulou, A., Veroniki, A. A., Rios, P., Vafaei, A., Zarin, W., Giannatsi, M., Sullivan, S., Tricco, A. C., Chaimani, A., Egger, M., & Salanti, G. (2017). Bibliographic study showed improving statistical methodology of network meta-analyses published between 1999 and 2015. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 82, 20–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pryce, J., Richardson, M., & Lengeler, C. (2018). Insecticide-treated nets for preventing malaria. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rao, J., & Scott, A. (1992). A simple method for the analysis of clustered binary data. Biometrics, 577–585.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reitsma, J., Glas, A., Rutjes, A., Scholten, R., Bossuyt, P., & Zwinderman, A. (2005). Bivariate analysis of sensitivity and specificity produces informative summary measures in diagnostic reviews. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 58(10), 982–990.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Review Manager (RevMan). (2020). The Cochrane Collaboration.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sacks, H. S., Berrier, J., Reitman, D., Ancona-Berk, V. A., & Chalmers, T. C. (1987). Meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials. The New England Journal of Medicine, 316(8), 450–455.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salanti, G. (2008). Evaluation of networks of randomized trials. Statistical Methods in Medical Research, 17, 279–301.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salanti, G. (2012). 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), 80–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Santesso, N., Glenton, C., Dahm, P., Garner, P., Akl, E. A., Alper, B., Brignardello-Petersen, R., Carrasco-Labra, A., De Beer, H., Hultcrantz, M., Kuijpers, T., Meerpohl, J., Morgan, R., Mustafa, R., Skoetz, N., Sultan, S., Wiysonge, C., Guyatt, G., & Schünemann, H. J. (2020). GRADE guidelines 26: Informative statements to communicate the findings of systematic reviews of interventions. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 119, 126–135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schünemann, H. J., Brożek, J., Guyatt, G. H., & A. Oxman. (2013). GRADE Handbook.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schünemann, H. J., Mustafa, R. A., Brozek, J., Steingart, K. R., Leeflang, M., Murad, M. H., Bossuyt, P., Glasziou, P., Jaeschke, R., Lange, S., Meerpohl, J., Langendam, M., Hultcrantz, M., Vist, G. E., Akl, E. A., Helfand, M., Santesso, N., Hooft, L., Scholten, R., Rosen, M., Rutjes, A., Crowther, M., Muti, P., Raatz, H., Ansari, M. T., Williams, J., Kunz, R., Harris, J., Rodriguez, I. A., Kohli, M., & Guyatt, G. H. (2020). GRADE guidelines: 21 part 1. Study design, risk of bias, and indirectness in rating the certainty across a body of evidence for test accuracy. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 122, 129–141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shah, M., Hanrahan, C., Wang, Z. Y., Dendukuri, N., Lawn, S. D., Denkinger, C. M., & Steingart, K. R. (2016). Lateral flow urine lipoarabinomannan assay for detecting active tuberculosis in HIV-positive adults. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 5, CD011420.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shea, B. J., Reeves, B. C., Wells, G., Thuku, M., Hamel, C., Moran, J., Moher, D., Tugwell, P., Welch, V., Kristjansson, E., & Henry, D. A. (2017). AMSTAR 2: A critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews that include randomised or non-randomised studies of healthcare interventions, or both. BMJ, 358, j4008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Šimundić, A. (2009). Measures of diagnostic accuracy: Basic definitions. EJIFCC, 19(4), 203–211.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smithuis, F. M., Kyaw, M. K., Phe, U. O., van der Broek, I., Katterman, N., Rogers, C., Almeida, P., Kager, P. A., Stepniewska, K., Lubell, Y., Simpson, J. A., & White, N. J. (2013). The effect of insecticide-treated bed nets on the incidence and prevalence of malaria in children in an area of unstable seasonal transmission in western Myanmar. Malaria Journal, 12(1), 363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sobieraj, D. M., J. C. Cappelleri, W. L. Baker, O. J. Phung, C. M. White and C. I. Coleman (2013) Methods used to conduct and report Bayesian mixed treatment comparisons published in the medical literature: a systematic review. Bmj Open 3(7)

    Google Scholar 

  • Sutton, A., Clowes, M., Preston, L., & Booth, A. (2019). Meeting the review family: Exploring review types and associated information retrieval requirements. Health Information and Libraries Journal, 36(3), 202–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Takwoingi, Y., Riley, R., & Deeks, J. (2015). Meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy studies in mental health. Evidence-Based Mental Health, 18(4), 103–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Takwoingi, Y., Guo, B., Riley, R. D., & Deeks, J. J. (2017). Performance of methods for meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy with few studies or sparse data. Statistical Methods in Medical Research, 26(4), 1896–1911.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tricco, A. C., Antony, J., Zarin, W., Strifler, L., Ghassemi, M., Ivory, J., Perrier, L., Hutton, B., Moher, D., & Straus, S. E. (2015). A sco** review of rapid review methods. BMC Medicine, 13, 224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tricco, A. C., Lillie, E., Zarin, W., O’Brien, K., Colquhoun, H., Kastner, M., Levac, D., Ng, C., Sharpe, J. P., Wilson, K., Kenny, M., Warren, R., Wilson, C., Stelfox, H. T., & Straus, S. E. (2016). A sco** review on the conduct and reporting of sco** reviews. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 16, 15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tricco, A. C., Lillie, E., Zarin, W., O’Brien, K. K., Colquhoun, H., Levac, D., Moher, D., Peters, M. D. J., Horsley, T., Weeks, L., Hempel, S., Akl, E. A., Chang, C., McGowan, J., Stewart, L., Hartling, L., Aldcroft, A., Wilson, M. G., Garritty, C., Lewin, S., Godfrey, C. M., Macdonald, M. T., Langlois, E. V., Soares-Weiser, K., Moriarty, J., Clifford, T., Tuncalp, O., & Straus, S. E. (2018). PRISMA extension for sco** reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and explanation. Annals of Internal Medicine, 169(7), 467–473.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Stralen, K. J., Stel, V. S., Reitsma, J. B., Dekker, F. W., Zoccali, C., & Jager, K. J. (2009). Diagnostic methods I: Sensitivity, specificity, and other measures of accuracy. Kidney International, 75(12), 1257–1263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Venekamp, R. P., Sanders, S. L., Glasziou, P. P., Del Mar, C. B., & Rovers, M. M. (2015). Antibiotics for acute otitis media in children. Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 2015(6), Cd000219.

    Google Scholar 

  • Veroniki, A. A., Mavridis, D., Higgins, J. P. T., & Salanti, G. (2014). Characteristics of a loop of evidence that affect detection and estimation of inconsistency: A simulation study. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 14(1), 1–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • White, I. R. (2011). Multivariate random-effects meta-regression: Updates to mvmeta. Stata Journal, 11(2), 255–270.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • White, I. R., Barrett, J. K., & Higgins, J. P. T. (2012). Consistency and inconsistency in network meta-analysis: Model estimation using multivariate. Research Synthesis Methods, 3(June 2011), 111–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whiting, P., Rutjes, A., Reitsma, J., Glas, A., Bossuyt, P., & Kleijnen, J. (2004). Sources of variation and bias in studies of diagnostic accuracy: A systematic review. Annals of Internal Medicine, 140(3), 189–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whiting, P. F., Rutjes, A. W., Westwood, M. E., Mallett, S., & Q.-S. Group. (2013). A systematic review classifies sources of bias and variation in diagnostic test accuracy studies. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 66(10), 1093–1104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whiting, P., Savovic, J., Higgins, J. P., Caldwell, D. M., Reeves, B. C., Shea, B., Davies, P., Kleijnen, J., Churchill, R., & R. Group. (2016). ROBIS: A new tool to assess risk of bias in systematic reviews was developed. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 69, 225–234.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whiting-O’Keefe, Q., Henke, C., & Simborg, D. W. (1984). Choosing the correct unit of analysis in medical care experiments. Medical Care, 1101–1114.

    Google Scholar 

  • WHO. (2015). The use of lateral flow urine lipoarabinomannan assay (LF-LAM) for the diagnosis and screening of active tuberculosis in people living with HIV. Policy guidance. World Health Organization.

    Google Scholar 

  • WHO. (2019a). Guidelines for malaria vector control. Licence: CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO.

    Google Scholar 

  • WHO. (2019b). World malaria report. Geneva.

    Google Scholar 

  • WHO. (2020a). WHO consolidated guidelines on tuberculosis (Module 3: Diagnosis – Rapid diagnostics for tuberculosis detection). World Health Organization.

    Google Scholar 

  • WHO. (2020b). WHO operational handbook on tuberculosis (Module 3: Diagnosis – rapid diagnostics for tuberculosis detection). World Health Organization.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, T., McCaul, M., Schwarzer, G., Cipriani, A., Stein, D. J., & Ipser, J. (2020). Pharmacological treatments for social anxiety disorder in adults: A systematic review and network meta-analysis. Acta Neuropsychiatr, 32(4), 169–176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wood, L., Egger, M., Gluud, L. L., Schulz, K. F., Jüni, P., Altman, D. G., Gluud, C., Martin, R. M., Wood, A. J. G., & Sterne, J. A. C. (2008). Empirical evidence of bias in treatment effect estimates in controlled trials with different interventions and outcomes: Meta-epidemiological study. BMJ, 336(7644), 601–605.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Young, T., Garner, P., Clarke, M., & Volmink, J. (2017). Series: Clinical epidemiology in South Africa. Paper 1: Evidence-based health care and policy in Africa: Past, present, and future. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 83, 24–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhen, J., Chan, C., Schoonees, A., Apatu, E., Thabane, L., & Young, T. (2020). Transmission of respiratory viruses when using public ground transport: A rapid review to inform public health recommendations during the COVID-19 pandemic. South African Medical Journal, 110(6), 478–483.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health SUNY Downstate Health Sciences University, Brooklyn, New York, USA

    Samuel A. Abariga

  2. Division Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Stellenbosch University, Cape Town, South Africa

    Michael McCaul

  3. Centre for Evidence-based Health Care, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Stellenbosch University, Cape Town, South Africa

    Michael McCaul, Alfred Musekiwa, Eleanor Ochodo & Anke Rohwer

  4. South African GRADE Network, Cape Town, South Africa

    Michael McCaul

  5. School of Health Systems and Public Health, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, South Africa

    Alfred Musekiwa

  6. Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA

    Alfred Musekiwa

  7. Centre for Global Health Research, Kenya Medical Research Institute (KEMRI), Kisumu, Kenya

    Eleanor Ochodo

Authors
  1. Samuel A. Abariga
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Michael McCaul
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Alfred Musekiwa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Eleanor Ochodo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Anke Rohwer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michael McCaul .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. College of Health Solutions, Arizona State University, Phoenix, AZ, USA

    Ding-Geng (Din) Chen

  2. Department of Statistics, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, South Africa

    Samuel O. M. Manda

  3. School of Public Health, Division of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa

    Tobias F. Chirwa

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Abariga, S.A., McCaul, M., Musekiwa, A., Ochodo, E., Rohwer, A. (2022). Evidence-Informed Public Health, Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis. In: Chen, DG.(., Manda, S.O.M., Chirwa, T.F. (eds) Modern Biostatistical Methods for Evidence-Based Global Health Research. Emerging Topics in Statistics and Biostatistics . Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-11012-2_5

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation