What is the difference between systematic reviews and meta-analysis?

What is the difference between systematic reviews and meta-analysis?

A systematic review is a comprehensive survey of existing literature on a specific topic, while a meta-analysis statistically combines results from multiple studies to provide a more precise estimate of effect.

Can you explain why both are important in research?

Both are crucial as they help synthesize evidence, reduce bias, and provide clearer insights into research questions, guiding clinical and policy decisions.

Are there any limitations to using meta-analysis?

Yes, limitations include potential publication bias, variability in study quality, and the risk of overgeneralizing results if studies are too heterogeneous.

How do researchers decide when to conduct a meta-analysis?

Researchers typically conduct a meta-analysis when there are enough high-quality studies on a topic, and they seek to quantify the overall effect or resolve conflicting results.

What are some common fields where these methods are applied?

Common fields include medicine, psychology, education, and social sciences, where evidence synthesis is vital for informed decision-making.