A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

The role of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of incidence and prevalence studies in neuroepidemiology. | LitMetric

The role of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of incidence and prevalence studies in neuroepidemiology.

Neuroepidemiology

Department of Community Health Sciences and Institute for Public Health, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alta., Canada.

Published: August 2014

Background: Systematic reviews and meta-analyses on the incidence and prevalence of neurological conditions are important methods of quantifying the burden and risk of disease.

Methods: The rigorous methodology required in order to minimize publication bias, account for study heterogeneity, and variation in study quality are described. When appropriate, a meta-analysis is a powerful statistical tool that can help synthesize a vast literature quantitatively, taking into account study heterogeneity. As the epidemiology of neurological conditions continue to be widely studied internationally, systematic reviews and meta-analyses have become essential.

Results: If not conducted carefully, systematic reviews and meta-analyses in neuroepidemiology may lead to erroneous conclusions. It is important to consider various methodological, clinical and statistical factors at all stages of the review and analysis process. Detailed documentation should be kept to assist in the reporting process.

Conclusions: Published reporting standards should be consulted when conducting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of the incidence and prevalence of neurological conditions, though reporting standards specific to neuroepidemiology are urgently needed.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1159/000355533DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

systematic reviews
20
reviews meta-analyses
20
meta-analyses incidence
12
incidence prevalence
12
neurological conditions
12
prevalence neurological
8
account study
8
study heterogeneity
8
reporting standards
8
reviews
5

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!