Did authors work to written protocol?
Have authors defined research questions clearly?
Have authors described there search strategy & how studies were chosen for inclusion/exclusion?
How have authors assessed quality of individual studies?
ideally by at least 2 persons with an assessment of their inter-rater reliability;
should be made without knowledge of author's final conclusions, their identity or institution;
there exist guidelines for assessing quality;
? rank studies by quality;
How have authors abstracted the information from individual studies?
Have authors provided adequate details of the subjects included in the studies being analysed?
Have authors plotted their results?
How have authors inspected the data for heterogeneity of outcome?
are the differences in indiv. trial outcomes greater than one could reasonably expect by chances alone, if so, then should the data be pooled at all?
assess with either O2 or L'AbbJ plots;
How have authors calculated a summary estimate of the effect of intervention?
Have authors inspected data for evidence of publication bias?
“positive” studies are more likely to be submitted and accepted than “negative” studies → “anticonservative influence” & may depend in part on vested interests;
may be the most important bias affecting meta-analysis!
assess with “funnel plot” symmetry & base region;