Abstract
The author discusses the significance and potential pitfalls in performing a meta-analysis underscoring the importance of a usual forgotten issue in meta-analysis called clinical heterogeneity. Clinical heterogeneity can mislead results and misinform clinicians. Practical examples from the literature are given, and the results of meta-analyses are compared with the results of subsequent large randomised clinical trials addressing similar questions from a historical and contemporary point of view, highlighting clinical heterogeneity. The contemporary aspect culminates with the presentation of a meta-analysis evaluating myocardial cell regeneration with an emphasis in clinical heterogeneity, helping clinicians to understand the issue and better appraise future meta-analyses.
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
