Meta-analysis has been regarded as the critical tool of assisting the healthcare professionals to make decisions. And the theory of evidence-based medicine is widely disseminated in domestic. However, it must be noted that the increasing number of meta-analyses causes a fact that several meta-analyses investigating the same or similar clinical questions were captured commonly. More importantly, the results from these meta-analyses are often conflicting. Consequently, decision-making of those healthcare professionals who depend on those results become a thorny thing. To address this issue, Jadad et al. from McMaster University proposed an adjunct algorithm to help healthcare professionals to select the best result from conflicting meta-analyses to make decisions properly. Our article will introduce the tool briefly and explain the process of it with an example.
Citation： SHUAITing, TIANXu, WANGXin-tian, JINYing-hui, YILi-Juan, ZHANGHui, SONGGuo-min. A Brief Introduction of Jadad Algorithm of Interpreting Discordant Meta-analyses. Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine, 2016, 16(4): 492-496. doi: 10.7507/1672-2531.20160076 Copy