Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Evaluation & the Health Professions
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Bangert-Drowns, R. L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Bangert-Drowns, R. L.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Misunderstanding Meta-Analysis

Robert L. Bangert-Drowns

State University of New York at Albany

Although it is increasingly common, metaanalysis is still a relatively new addition to the toolbox of research strategies. Partially because of its newness and partially because its early enthusiasts may have overstated its presumed contributions, a number of common misunderstandings have developed about the meta-analytic approach. These misunderstandings have to do with the way that metaanalysis is conducted and interpreted and its relation to primary research and narrative review. This article aims to highlight these misunderstandings and offer an alternative view of meta-analysis. It is hoped that metaanalytic research of the future will be a partnership with primary research and that metaanalysis will be valued not so much for its definitiveness as for the creative speculations it allows about patterns that appear across studies.

Evaluation & the Health Professions, Vol. 18, No. 3, 304-314 (1995)
DOI: 10.1177/016327879501800305
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?