title: Strengths and pitfalls of meta-analysis reports in vesicoureteral reflux.
abstract: There are many ongoing controversies surrounding vesicoureteral reflux (VUR). These include variable aspects of this common congenital anomaly. Lack of evidence-based recommendations has prolonged the debate. Systematic reviews (SRs) and meta-analysis (MA) are considered high-level evidence. The purpose of this review article is to summarize and critically appraise the available SR/MA pertaining to VUR. We also discuss the strength and pitfalls of SR/MA in general. A thorough literature search identified 9 SRs/MAs relevant to VUR. Both authors critically reviewed these articles for contents and methodological issues. There are many concerns about the quality of the studies included in these SRs. Clinical heterogeneity stemming from different patient selection criteria, interventions, and outcome definitions is a major issue. In spite of major advances in understanding different aspects of VUR in the last few decades, there is a paucity of randomized controlled trials in this field.
authors.affiliation: Department of Urologic Sciences, University of British Columbia and BC Children's Hospital, Vancouver BC, Canada V5Z 1M9. K. Afshar, afshark@yahoo.com
authors.forename: K
authors.initials: K
authors.lastname: Afshar
authors.forename: A E
authors.initials: AE
authors.lastname: Macneily