Chevron Left
Retour à Introduction to Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Avis et commentaires pour d'étudiants pour Introduction to Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis par Université Johns-Hopkins

4.8
étoiles
2,215 évaluations
590 avis

À propos du cours

We will introduce methods to perform systematic reviews and meta-analysis of clinical trials. We will cover how to formulate an answerable research question, define inclusion and exclusion criteria, search for the evidence, extract data, assess the risk of bias in clinical trials, and perform a meta-analysis. Upon successfully completing this course, participants will be able to: - Describe the steps in conducting a systematic review - Develop an answerable question using the “Participants Interventions Comparisons Outcomes” (PICO) framework - Describe the process used to collect and extract data from reports of clinical trials - Describe methods to critically assess the risk of bias of clinical trials - Describe and interpret the results of meta-analyses...

Meilleurs avis

MJ

Jan 08, 2019

Although introductory, I do carry out reviews as a researcher. I Learned a lot to improve my systematic reviews through this course. High quality, though the music could be a little less intense.

PS

Aug 23, 2019

Introduction to Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis course is a very good source for beginners which provides an overview on fundamental terminology and steps involved in the systematic review.

Filtrer par :

551 - 575 sur 584 Avis pour Introduction to Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

par Jorge P

Jul 13, 2016

It's a very good introductory course to systematic reviews.

par Yousab Y H

Feb 15, 2017

good material and knowledge ... but some how boring ...

par H M A

Oct 01, 2020

It was a great learning experience.

Thanks Coursers !!

par Madhurima D

May 31, 2020

The course was well structured and very informative.

par Gerardo G

Mar 04, 2018

very helpful, spect to see more of these and deeper

par Hamed K

Sep 19, 2019

I feel the material been covered not sufficient.

par Deepak K

Jun 16, 2020

It was a nice experience...very much useful...

par Hani M

Jun 26, 2016

Very well organized and very informative.

par Cássio M B V

Aug 24, 2019

An excellent introduction to the topic.

par suresh

Apr 25, 2017

excellent information for researcher..

par Karla H S

Oct 21, 2020

Great course! verry interesting!!

par Victoria S

Jan 03, 2017

Excellent introductory material!

par Ahmed G

Sep 21, 2017

very useful and informative

par neeraj

May 16, 2017

It was a good learning

par Hassan S

Jan 31, 2017

thank you very much

par dr j b

Nov 23, 2018

More on peto maybe

par Felix J G G

Jul 23, 2017

Need updates...

par AHMED M

Aug 14, 2016

very useful

par Dorice L V

May 30, 2017

I found this course extremely helpful, but I think it needs to be updated. It might be useful to discuss a few key tools that are essential to SRs, one in particular the Equator Network for Systematic Reviews. SRs should be registered with PROSPERO. If you show a PROSPERO record, it will help reinforce some of the concepts you are teaching. Some quiz questions are ambiguous. I do not have my notes at the time of this writing so cannot point out the problem. I think the problem was in Module 2. My most important concern is with the final assignment. Having worked with so many groups on writing as well as evaluating SRs, "those who analyzed the data" would not need to be blinded to the treatment phase but the outcome phase. It is my assumption that the sentence could have been written in a more meaningful way: " . . . were blinded to treatment and outcomes assessment." From a "critical thinking" standpoint, which is what I always try to get students to do because of the quality (or lack thereof) of writing, I thought this through carefully, and came up with a significantly different answer. The course is geared so heavily to what is taught at Johns Hopkins. This can be a bit wearying for some, though I appreciate the quality of your program. The literature searching component could also use an update, but I did find much of the lecture very helpful--there are several webinars that will help the librarian (just as a refresher). The examples that were used throughout the slides were exceptional and helped me to understand much of the material from a student's point of view. Overall, the course will help me with teaching and evaluating SRs and MAs. Thank you!

par Dr. P A

Aug 18, 2020

It's a good course and introduces the learner to systematic reviews. Some of the modules are really good but important information is missing at many places. After the completing the course, I still do not have the complete basic information regarding all the the things that go into a systematic review. The instructors listed them at the end of the module, but it would have been better had they incorporated at least some of them into the modules. Week 1-4 modules were presented well but in week 5 module, there was a lot of repetition regarding the definition of systematic reviews/meta analysis, though what was required was a more clarity in the main content.

par Debleena G

Sep 24, 2020

I feel rather the course should additionally include the following: 1) the detailed analysis techniques performed in meta analysis- calculation of pooled OR/ SMD, generation of forest plots, funnel plots for publication bias, meta-regression or sub group analysis. 2) the different tools used to perform meta-analysis like RevMan, Stata, etc. 3) conducting meta-analysis in different type of datasets- discrete data, continuous data. 3) network meta-analysis.

par Ibraheem M S A

May 01, 2020

the overall course is well-structured, and is a good start for a novice reviewer, however, it's poorly recorded (*speaker wise, that one with the hat sounded she was forced to do it, huffing and puffing), and confusing at times without a pointer to guide/navigate on slide. But, overall very well done.

par Pietro P

May 02, 2017

Five stars for the excellent teachers and content, but the course is not made for Coursera: very long videos, slides full of words, many references to the group work for the course at JHU, tiny quizzes and just two practical assignments. The format and the examinations can be definitely improved.

par Aileen A S

Aug 25, 2020

The courses are great but some of them requires prior general understanding. Therefore, as a beginner it's a bit hard for me to get the whole picture.

par Payal S

Oct 14, 2019

Although the course faculty is good, it would be really helpful if there were notes summarizing each week.