Heidenreich, P. A., McDonald, K. M., Hastie, T., Fadel, B., Hagan, V., Lee, B. K., & Hlatky, M. (1999). Meta-analysis of trials comparing beta-blockers, calcium antagonists, and nitrates for stable angina. JAMA, 281(20), 1927-1936.
Yes. The article reviewed is a meta-analysis.
The discussion of justification or need for the meta-review was brief. Statistics regarding the prevalence of stable angina were presented as well as pharmacotherapy used to prevent symptoms. It was explained that first choice for treatment remains controversial and recent studies have shown risks involved with certain treatments which have led to increased controversy. Therefore a meta-analysis was needed to determine efficacy and safety of treatments.
The purpose of the study was to compare the efficacy and tolerability of treatment for patients with stable angina, with beta-blockers, calcium antagonists, and long-acting nitrates. No formal research question.
English-language studies published between 1966 and 1997 were identified with a MEDLINE and EMBASE search and a review of bibliographies in these articles. Two independent reviewers reviewed data and the outcome data was reviewed a third time by one of the investigators.
Randomized and crossover studies which compared antianginal drugs from 2 or 3 classes to include beta-blockers, calcium antagonists, and long-acting nitrates, for one week, were chosen for review. Inclusion criteria for study selection was at least one of the following outcomes: cardiac death, myocardial infarction, study withdrawal because of adverse results, angina frequency, nitroglycerin use, or exercise duration. Of the studies reviewed, 63% or 90 out of 143 met inclusion criteria.
Results were appropriately combined with the use of odds ratios for discrete data and me
...