Main Article Content

Systematic reviews (SR) have been important tools for determining the magnitude of an effect, with appropriate methodology, rigor and scientific quality. This epidemiologic design was developed to conduct an exhaustive, systematic and explicit assessment of the literature, based on a clearly research question, an explicit methodology, a critical appraisal using a variety of tools and a qualitative summary of the evidence. On the other hand, the meta-analysis (MA), is the statistical analysis used in the synthesis of the evidence at the end of a very well performed systematic review. It compares head to head interventions, however nowadays, we have another tool to perform indirect or mixed comparisons (Network meta-analysis). This new statistical tool evaluates the effectiveness when comparing different treatments with similar characteristics, which have not been directly compared in a study. Unlike the traditional meta-analysis, this new tool compares the results of different studies that have a point or a common intervention without a direct comparison.

Herney Andrés García Perdomo, Universidad del Valle. Cali, Colombia


Professor of Facultad de Salud -Universidad del Valle

Fellow of the American College of Surgeons (FACS)
Editor in Chief - Urología Colombiana Journal.
Member and peer reviewer of Cochrane Renal Group, Cochrane Sexually Transmitted Infections Group and
Cochrane Prostatic diseases and urological cancer group.
Coordinator Associate Cochrane Group Universidad del Valle

García Perdomo, H. A. (2018). Enhancing the quality and transparency of systematic reviews. Colombia Médica, 49(4), 251–253.


Download data is not yet available.

Similar Articles

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.