今天推薦的是2019年發表在European Journal of Epidemiology期刊的一篇元分析文章，這篇文章對元分析的設計、進行和發表提供了具體的指導步驟，雖然是對醫學元分析的指南，但是絕大部分內容對社會科學領域也是適用的，故推薦大家讀一讀此文章。
中文摘要
為了給衛生保健中的循證實踐、指南和政策以建議，要求以全面，有意義且省時的方式準確識別、整理和整合所有可用證據。證據綜合的方法，例如精心進行的系統綜述和元分析，是總結特定主題的必不可少的工具。不幸的是，並不是所有的系統綜述都是真正系統的，並且它們的質量可能會有很大差異。由於進行良好的證據綜合通常涉及一系列複雜的步驟，因此我們認為就如何進行系統綜述和元分析制定連貫的逐步指南至關重要。儘管大多數有關系統綜述的指南都側重於如何報告或評估系統綜述，但它們卻缺乏有關如何有效地綜合證據的指導。為促進證據綜合的設計和開發，我們提供了一個清晰簡潔的24步指南，指導如何進行觀察性研究和臨床試驗的系統綜述和元分析。我們描述了每個步驟，並通過具體示例進行了說明，並提供了相關參考資料以供進一步參考。該24步指南（1）簡化了進行系統綜述的方法，（2）為醫療保健專家和研究人員提供了進行系統評價和元分析的方法學上合理的工具，並且（3）可以提高現有證據綜合的質量。本指南將幫助其讀者更好地了解過程的複雜性、評估已發表的系統綜述的質量並更好地理解（和使用）醫學文獻中的證據。
英文題目和摘要：
A 24-step guide on how to design, conduct, and successfully publish a systematic review and meta-analysis in medical research
To inform evidence-based practice in health care, guidelines and policies require accurate identification, collation, and integration of all available evidence in a comprehensive, meaningful, and time-efficient manner. Approaches to evidence synthesis such as carefully conducted systematic reviews and meta-analyses are essential tools to summarize specific topics. Unfortunately, not all systematic reviews are truly systematic, and their quality can vary substantially. Since well-conducted evidence synthesis typically involves a complex set of steps, we believe formulating a cohesive, step-by-step guide on how to conduct a systemic review and meta-analysis is essential. While most of the guidelines on systematic reviews focus on how to report or appraise systematic reviews, they lack guidance on how to synthesize evidence efficiently. To facilitate the design and development of evidence syntheses, we provide a clear and concise, 24-step guide on how to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies and clinical trials. We describe each step, illustrate it with concrete examples, and provide relevant references for further guidance. The 24-step guide (1) simplifies the methodology of conducting a systematic review, (2) provides healthcare professionals and researchers with methodologically sound tools for conducting systematic reviews and meta-analyses, and (3) it can enhance the quality of existing evidence synthesis efforts. This guide will help its readers to better understand the complexity of the process, appraise the quality of published systematic reviews, and better comprehend (and use) evidence from medical literature.