Moulis G, Sommet A
Service de médecine interne, salle Le Tallec, CHU de Toulouse Purpan, place du Dr-Baylac, TSA 40031, 31059 Toulouse cedex 9, France; UMR 1027, université de Toulouse III, 31062 Toulouse cedex 9, France; Inserm, UMR 1027, équipe 6 « pharmacoépidémiologie, évaluation de l'utilisation et du risque médicamenteux », 31000 Toulouse cedex 9, France.
UMR 1027, université de Toulouse III, 31062 Toulouse cedex 9, France; Inserm, UMR 1027, équipe 6 « pharmacoépidémiologie, évaluation de l'utilisation et du risque médicamenteux », 31000 Toulouse cedex 9, France; Service de pharmacologie médicale et clinique, centre régional Midi-Pyrénées de pharmacovigilance et d'information sur le médicament, 31000 Toulouse cedex 9, France.
Rev Med Interne. 2014 Apr;35(4):250-8. doi: 10.1016/j.revmed.2013.07.011. Epub 2013 Sep 9.
Meta-analysis is aimed at assessing an exhaustive, unbiased, reproducible, quantified and accurate synthesis of a research problem. It is sustained by a systematic review of the literature and has statistical particularities. Sources of error and bias are numerous. In this paper, we describe them following the methodology steps of a well-conducted meta-analysis. Causes of divergent conclusions of meta-analyses are described and illustrated with the example of cancer risk assessment in TNF inhibitor-treated rheumatoid arthritis patients. Eventually, this article provides key-points to help readers to detect sources of error and bias in meta-analyses.