HP4G4E      Half Unit
Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

This information is for the 2019/20 session.

Teacher responsible

Dr Elizaveta Osipenko COW 4.10

Availability

This course is compulsory on the Executive MSc in Evaluation of Health Care Interventions and Outcomes, in collaboration with NICE. This course is not available as an outside option.

Course content

Systematic review and meta-analysis methods are increasingly used to evaluate the relative benefits and harms of healthcare interventions. A broad range of decision making bodies across the health care sector (including health technology assessment bodies, drug and medical device licensing agencies, biopharmaceutical industry, and hospitals) need experts equipped with the methods of reviewing and synthesizing the existing body of evidence.

This course will be focused on the principles of reviewing and synthesizing the existing body of literature. The course will first provide the rationale for adopting a systematic approach for evidence review and synthesis. It will then equip students with the methods to undertake risk of bias assessments of individual randomized controlled trials and also collections of randomized controlled trials. In addition to providing an overview of methods for quantitatively synthesizing multiple randomized controlled trials in meta-analysis, the course will present the opportunities and challenges of using evidence for decision-making in health care.

Learning outcomes:

Teaching

20 hours of seminars and 4 hours of computer workshops in the ST.

Formative coursework

Indicative reading

Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Inter ventions (version 5.1.0, updated March 2011).

Institute of Medicine. Finding what works in health care: standards for systematic reviews. 23 March 2011.

Sutton AJ et al. Methods for Meta-analysis in Medical Research. Wiley, Chichester, UK, 2000.

Cook DJ. Systematic reviews: synthesis of best evidence for clinical decisions. Annals of internal medicine 1997;126(5):376–80.

Jansen JP et al. Is network meta-analysis as valid as standard pair wise meta- analysis? It all depends on the distribution of effect modifiers. BMC medicine 2013;11(1):159.

Jansen JP et al. Interpreting indirect treatment comparisons and network meta- analysis for health-care decision making: report of the ISPOR Task Force on Indirect Treatment Comparisons Good Research Practices: part 1. Value Health 2011;14(4):417–28.

Assessment

Research project (100%) in the ST.

Key facts

Department: Health Policy

Total students 2018/19: Unavailable

Average class size 2018/19: Unavailable

Controlled access 2018/19: No

Value: Half Unit

Guidelines for interpreting course guide information

Personal development skills