Cookies on this website

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Accept all cookies' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. If you click 'Reject all non-essential cookies' only necessary cookies providing core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility will be enabled. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

It is important to recognize the studies that yield the most reliable evidence upon which to base treatment decisions. Randomized trials have a particular place in providing high-quality unbiased comparisons of different treatments, when carried out to a high methodological standard. Empirical evidence shows that such trials are not always done well, and also that poor methodology is associated with biased findings. Consumers of the published literature need to be able to recognize which trials can be trusted. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses offer an organized approach to assessing all the relevant literature on a topic, particularly when several randomized trials address the same treatment comparison. Like trials, systematic reviews and meta-analyses need to be carried out to a high standard. They offer particular potential for providing the most useful information for clinical decision making. Critical aspects of these types of study are considered in this paper.

Original publication




Conference paper

Publication Date



51 Suppl 1


36 - 43


Bias, Clinical Protocols, Decision Support Techniques, Evidence-Based Medicine, Humans, Meta-Analysis as Topic, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Research Design