Every type of evidence is evaluated against results which are experienced immediately, after some time and even after a long period of time. When evaluating evidence, the level of inevitability of the underlying connection between the intervention and the detected results and time limits are considered. The quality of every type of evidence is evaluated in accordance to the recognized standards for that specific type of evidence. It is quite difficult to determine the meaning of each evidence. Therefore, it is important to consider the reliability of the methods of evidence, the interpretation of the evidence, the deductions from the evidence and its relevance to the existing methods.
The two different methods of evidence evaluation are systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Both of these methods are positioned at the top of the evidence pyramid. They provide high quality evidence and their mode of research produces results that are not subject to manipulation, therefore, they are more reliable. They also include a variety of references to the main studies that are relevant to the specific evidence. Generally, a meta-analysis is a part of a systematic review but this does not mean that it is more reliable. There is a fallacy that these two approaches are the same and that sometimes they are used interchangeably.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
A systematic review collects all the obtained practical research using systematic approaches that are well-defined to find answers to a particular question whereas, a meta-analysis is the arithmetic process that evaluates and combines outcomes from multiple studies. In addition, it classifies the studies that are suitable and weighs the rationality of the results, for example, through the evaluation of risks, while a meta-analysis is used to determine the common outcome when the size of the outcome is reliable from one study to the other. This makes a meta-analysis a safer foundation than a single study because of the large number of subjects. Thus, a systematic review is intended to ensure a clear, generative process to add and exclude studies for scrutiny. On the other hand, a meta-analysis is done only when similar multiple studies with their definitions have been identified.
