Cargando…
Charting the landscape of graphical displays for meta-analysis and systematic reviews: a comprehensive review, taxonomy, and feature analysis
BACKGROUND: Data-visualization methods are essential to explore and communicate meta-analytic data and results. With a large number of novel graphs proposed quite recently, a comprehensive, up-to-date overview of available graphing options for meta-analysis is unavailable. METHODS: We applied a mult...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7006175/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32028897 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-020-0911-9 |
_version_ | 1783495089240145920 |
---|---|
author | Kossmeier, Michael Tran, Ulrich S. Voracek, Martin |
author_facet | Kossmeier, Michael Tran, Ulrich S. Voracek, Martin |
author_sort | Kossmeier, Michael |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Data-visualization methods are essential to explore and communicate meta-analytic data and results. With a large number of novel graphs proposed quite recently, a comprehensive, up-to-date overview of available graphing options for meta-analysis is unavailable. METHODS: We applied a multi-tiered search strategy to find the meta-analytic graphs proposed and introduced so far. We checked more than 150 retrievable textbooks on research synthesis methodology cover to cover, six different software programs regularly used for meta-analysis, and the entire content of two leading journals on research synthesis. In addition, we conducted Google Scholar and Google image searches and cited-reference searches of prior reviews of the topic. Retrieved graphs were categorized into a taxonomy encompassing 11 main classes, evaluated according to 24 graph-functionality features, and individually presented and described with explanatory vignettes. RESULTS: We ascertained more than 200 different graphs and graph variants used to visualize meta-analytic data. One half of these have accrued within the past 10 years alone. The most prevalent classes were graphs for network meta-analysis (45 displays), graphs showing combined effect(s) only (26), funnel plot-like displays (24), displays showing more than one outcome per study (19), robustness, outlier and influence diagnostics (15), study selection and p-value based displays (15), and forest plot-like displays (14). The majority of graphs (130, 62.5%) possessed a unique combination of graph features. CONCLUSIONS: The rich and diverse set of available meta-analytic graphs offers a variety of options to display many different aspects of meta-analyses. This comprehensive overview of available graphs allows researchers to make better-informed decisions on which graphs suit their needs and therefore facilitates using the meta-analytic tool kit of graphs to its full potential. It also constitutes a roadmap for a goal-driven development of further graphical displays for research synthesis. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7006175 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-70061752020-02-11 Charting the landscape of graphical displays for meta-analysis and systematic reviews: a comprehensive review, taxonomy, and feature analysis Kossmeier, Michael Tran, Ulrich S. Voracek, Martin BMC Med Res Methodol Research Article BACKGROUND: Data-visualization methods are essential to explore and communicate meta-analytic data and results. With a large number of novel graphs proposed quite recently, a comprehensive, up-to-date overview of available graphing options for meta-analysis is unavailable. METHODS: We applied a multi-tiered search strategy to find the meta-analytic graphs proposed and introduced so far. We checked more than 150 retrievable textbooks on research synthesis methodology cover to cover, six different software programs regularly used for meta-analysis, and the entire content of two leading journals on research synthesis. In addition, we conducted Google Scholar and Google image searches and cited-reference searches of prior reviews of the topic. Retrieved graphs were categorized into a taxonomy encompassing 11 main classes, evaluated according to 24 graph-functionality features, and individually presented and described with explanatory vignettes. RESULTS: We ascertained more than 200 different graphs and graph variants used to visualize meta-analytic data. One half of these have accrued within the past 10 years alone. The most prevalent classes were graphs for network meta-analysis (45 displays), graphs showing combined effect(s) only (26), funnel plot-like displays (24), displays showing more than one outcome per study (19), robustness, outlier and influence diagnostics (15), study selection and p-value based displays (15), and forest plot-like displays (14). The majority of graphs (130, 62.5%) possessed a unique combination of graph features. CONCLUSIONS: The rich and diverse set of available meta-analytic graphs offers a variety of options to display many different aspects of meta-analyses. This comprehensive overview of available graphs allows researchers to make better-informed decisions on which graphs suit their needs and therefore facilitates using the meta-analytic tool kit of graphs to its full potential. It also constitutes a roadmap for a goal-driven development of further graphical displays for research synthesis. BioMed Central 2020-02-07 /pmc/articles/PMC7006175/ /pubmed/32028897 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-020-0911-9 Text en © The Author(s). 2020 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Kossmeier, Michael Tran, Ulrich S. Voracek, Martin Charting the landscape of graphical displays for meta-analysis and systematic reviews: a comprehensive review, taxonomy, and feature analysis |
title | Charting the landscape of graphical displays for meta-analysis and systematic reviews: a comprehensive review, taxonomy, and feature analysis |
title_full | Charting the landscape of graphical displays for meta-analysis and systematic reviews: a comprehensive review, taxonomy, and feature analysis |
title_fullStr | Charting the landscape of graphical displays for meta-analysis and systematic reviews: a comprehensive review, taxonomy, and feature analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | Charting the landscape of graphical displays for meta-analysis and systematic reviews: a comprehensive review, taxonomy, and feature analysis |
title_short | Charting the landscape of graphical displays for meta-analysis and systematic reviews: a comprehensive review, taxonomy, and feature analysis |
title_sort | charting the landscape of graphical displays for meta-analysis and systematic reviews: a comprehensive review, taxonomy, and feature analysis |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7006175/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32028897 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-020-0911-9 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT kossmeiermichael chartingthelandscapeofgraphicaldisplaysformetaanalysisandsystematicreviewsacomprehensivereviewtaxonomyandfeatureanalysis AT tranulrichs chartingthelandscapeofgraphicaldisplaysformetaanalysisandsystematicreviewsacomprehensivereviewtaxonomyandfeatureanalysis AT voracekmartin chartingthelandscapeofgraphicaldisplaysformetaanalysisandsystematicreviewsacomprehensivereviewtaxonomyandfeatureanalysis |