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

2,684 évaluations
713 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

7 janv. 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.

22 août 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 :

26 - 50 sur 709 Avis pour Introduction to Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

par 高文哲

4 mai 2019


par Saghir A

19 juil. 2018

Highly Recommended.

par neeraj

16 mai 2017

It was a good learning

par Hassan S

31 janv. 2017

thank you very much

par J B

23 nov. 2018

More on peto maybe

par Felix J G G

23 juil. 2017

Need updates...


14 août 2016

very useful

par Mohammad S A

2 mai 2020


par Tiago V

8 juin 2017



29 juil. 2019


par Dorice L V

30 mai 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

18 août 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

24 sept. 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 Pietro P

1 mai 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

25 août 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

14 oct. 2019

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


23 juin 2018

i would love to see how to extract data in software and use it for metaanalysis. which is more practical

par Charlotte R

27 nov. 2016

A good course that lacked practical information on performing a meta-analysis.


5 juin 2020

The course was very well-designed. The pace, content and materials were very good. Being the fellow from the related field of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, thought of sharing my views on some points. The last two lectures were comparatively too fast and some participants may not at all have prior exposure to the domain of epidemiology and biostatistics. Hence, the pace for these too needs to be adjusted for more comprehensive assessment. Secondly, the rubrics for the assignments, has scope for more structured presentation either in the form of tables or diagram. As such though they were very helpful, we needed to scroll down too much to find out the elaborate explanation for the same. Hence, a more structured format may be in excel, with vlookup functions for scoring system may be very handy at the back hand. This will facilitate the peer reviewer to have quick eye ball scrolling and in fact maximize the participation.

Am looking forward for more such courses on Meta-Regression and Network-Meta Analysis in future.

Thanks a lot to all the faculties who helped us in completing the course sucessfully. Moreover the peer reviewer help, and their precious time is also duly acknowledged.

Warm Regards and Thanks

Dr Ashwani Kumar Mishra

Additional Professor of Biostatistics

National Drug Dependence Treatment Centre (NDDTC)

Natioal Investigator-National Investigator for

National Survey on Drug Use, India 2019

All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS)

New Delhi-110029



par Graeme S

26 mai 2020

Very much appreciated the course content and its presentation. Always felt challenged and supported in completing the modules. The course content is well organized and logically sequenced, with clear instructions and use of examples. I especially like the balance in the way that systematic reviews seek to be information-led rather then method led and the inclusion of qualitative synthesis helps appreciate what is considered 'meaningful' nicely offsets any over reliance on statistical significance as the sole criterion regarding the importance of the research outcomes. However, the presentation of this part of the content was tentative and almost apologetic in emphasizing the importance of the qualitative synthesis, yet expressing a sense of uncertainty in how to do it. And sometimes the content got a bit skewed - for example it was stated that one has to be confident in one's judgements in order to make appropriate interpretations. When this kind of inductive process is applied as an assessment protocol it is interpretations that informs judgements, not the other way around (ie in assuming a description - analysis - interpretation - judgment sequence) - after all, one's is being asked for an overall judgement of quality.

par Arathi G

1 juil. 2020

This course enables you to understand the fundamentals of Systematic review and metaanalysis in such a way that it will not be forgotten.Each and every video had so much clarity with clear cut learning objectives that were met at the end of the lecture along with a summary.Just going through the stems and responses of the quizzes in itself was like another revision of the entire course.A good grip of fundamentals of meta analysis was a confidence booster.The assignments were thought provoking and the peer evaluation process was very liberating,On the whole a great course .

par Mina G

14 nov. 2017

Amazing course, definitely learned a lot regarding systematic reviews. The only thing I found to be a bit challenging is that at some lectures they assume you have previous knowledge in stats, while for someone like me this is my first stats course. But don't worry, it doesn't interfere a lot without your overall understanding of systematic reviews.

Note: it focuses a lot more on systematic review that it does on meta-analysis, which kind of makes sense because meta-analysis is only an optional component of a systematic review, as you'll get to know in this course.

par Maria E S J

25 oct. 2020

I would like to take this opportunity to thank COURSERA for my learnings about systematic review and meta analysis. Your course has provided me the basic knowledge on systematic review and meta analysis. The assignments the course provided have increased my confidence in this topic. I would like in the future to again enroll in advanced systematic review and meta analysis that will entail teaching me how to use the software in doing meta analysis and to engage in a collaborative work utilizing SRMA.

par Matias L

9 déc. 2019

Considero que este curso es una excelente introducción a una temática interesante y compleja como lo son las revisiones sistemáticas y el meta análisis. Los docentes son de primer nivel, dando consejos prácticos al igual que explicando los fundamentos teóricos. Como se deduce de estas líneas, el inglés no es mi idioma nativo, sin embargo con el nivel básico-intermedio que poseo del mismo pude completar el curso sin mayores dificultades. Aconsejo no dejar de hacerlo sólo por la brecha idiomática.

par Mart A S M

5 avr. 2020

Hi. I really enjoyed the course. This is a great introductory experience for me of systematic review and meta-analysis. In the future, maybe, I hope that the course or a separate course will have a section that walks the participant through an actual meta-analysis. Maybe, you can provide a screenshot of the actual literature search, how the quality of the study was measured, how the effect sizes were determined, etc. Overall, this is a great course.