Statistical methods can be improved within Cochrane pregnancy and childbirth reviews

Ref ID	600
First Author	R. D. Riley
Journal	JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY
Year Of Publishing	2011
URL	https://www.jclinepi.com/article/S0895-4356(10)00284-2/fulltext
Keywords	• Cochrane • Expertise • Gynaecology • Statistical • Publication bias • Heterogeneity • Inference
Problem(s)	• Inadequate analysis of heterogeneity • Poor consideration of publication bias • Lack of statistical expertise in handling of quantitative data • Incorrect interpretation or statistical inference error from meta-analysis
Number of systematic reviews included	75
Summary of Findings	Of the 44 reviews that reported one or more random effects meta-analyses, none correctly interpreted its pooled result. 91% of reviews did not assess publication bias. 65% of reviews with substantial heterogeneity did not explore the causes of the heterogeneity.
Did the article find that the problem(s) led to qualitative changes in interpretation of the results?	N/A
Are the methods of the article described in enough detail to replicate the study?	Yes