Meta-analyses of the same intervention can yield conflicting results due to differences in inclusion criteria, statistical methods, and outcome definitions.
This paper examines why meta-analyses on the same topic may disagree, highlighting that pooled estimates can vary based on methodological choices. It emphasizes the need to look beyond the summary effect to understand sources of heterogeneity.
Evidence Score
Study Evidence
Study 1. When meta-analyses disagree: looking beyond the pooled estimate.
observationalLakbar I, Poole D · Critical care (London, England) (2026)
Result:
Mechanism Graph
Limitations
- ⚠The paper does not provide a specific clinical example with quantitative data
- ⚠Abstract does not specify the number of meta-analyses compared or the clinical domain
Frequently Asked Questions
Why do meta-analyses on the same topic sometimes disagree?▼
Differences in inclusion criteria, statistical methods, and outcome definitions can lead to conflicting pooled estimates.
What should clinicians do when meta-analyses conflict?▼
Clinicians should examine the sources of heterogeneity, such as study populations and methods, rather than relying solely on the pooled estimate.
Is this paper about a specific treatment or general methodology?▼
It is a general methodological review on why meta-analyses may disagree, not focused on a specific intervention.
Does this paper provide a solution to conflicting meta-analyses?▼
It suggests looking beyond the pooled estimate to understand methodological differences, but does not offer a definitive resolution.
Products
Affiliate links coming soon. We only recommend products that match the doses and forms used in the cited research.
References
- 1.Lakbar I, Poole D. "When meta-analyses disagree: looking beyond the pooled estimate.." Critical care (London, England), 2026. PMID: 42503509 DOI: 10.1186/s13054-026-06216-1