Cited by 366Meta-analysis and systematic reviewsStatistical Methods in EpidemiologyStatistical Methods in Clinical Trials

Interpreting Results and Drawing Conclusions

Schünemann, Holger J, Oxman, Andrew D, Vist, Gunn E, Higgins, Julian PT, Deeks, Jonathan J, Glasziou, Paul, Guyatt, Gordon H·2008·Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions

Abstract

This chapter contains sections titled: Introduction Assessing the quality of a body of evidence Issues in applicability Interpreting results of statistical analyses Interpreting results from dichotomous outcomes (including numbers needed to treat) Interpreting results from continuous outcomes (including standardized mean differences) Drawing conclusions Chapter information References

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/9780470712184.ch12

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The review used GRADE to interpret findings and create Summary of findings tables.

    “We used the GRADE approach to interpret findings (Schünemann 2008) and used the GRADE profiler to import data from Review Manager 5 (RevMan) to create 'Summary of findings' tables.”
  • The degree of confidence in the estimate of effect across studies was assessed using GRADEpro and the GRADE approach.

    “The degree of confidence in the estimate of effect across studies was assessed using GRADEpro and the GRADE approach (Guyatt 2008; Schunemann 2008, Schunemann 2009).”

    From Audit and feedback: effects on professional practice and healthcare outcomes (2012) · cites this paper as Schunemann 2008

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Schünemann, H. J., Oxman, A. D., Vist, G. E., Higgins, J. P., Deeks, J. J., Glasziou, P., & Guyatt, G. H.
Affiliations
  • Instituto Nazionale Tumori Regina Elena (IT)
  • Nasjonalt Kunnskapssenter for Helsetjenesten (NO)
  • MRC Biostatistics Unit (GB)
  • University of Birmingham (GB)
  • University of Oxford (GB)
  • McMaster University (CA)
Venue
Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2008-09-22
Pages
359-387
OpenAlex
W4205195518
Cited by
366
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 31 · 2015: 36 · 2014: 42 · 2013: 52 · 2012: 55
Type
other
Language
en
Open access
closed
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Epidemiology
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials
Keywords
evidence quality assessment, applicability, statistical interpretation, binary outcomes, number needed to treat, continuous outcomes, standardized mean difference

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review