Week 8: Data Extraction, Risk of Bias, and Final Product

This week, I continued working through full-text readings of my selected studies while actively extracting data into my table. I additionally am attempting to figure out the risk of bias tool Cochrane. This requires a lot of reading and understanding of study design that further increases the time and attention each study requires.

At the same time, I made additions to my final paper. Since I have come further along in my project, I could add more onto my challenges and limitations. For example, I reflected on how conducting a meta-analysis alone may have introduced bias, since standard practice involves multiple reviewers independently screening studies and resolving disagreements. Without a second, independent perspective, there is a greater possibility that some studies were excluded or included based on my own interpretation alone.

I also added discussion of time constraints and how they limited the number of studies I was able to fully review. Because full-text reading and data extraction is time-intensive, I cannot realistically analyze every potentially relevant study in depth, which may have resulted in missing data. Additionally, I noted that my developing experience with meta-analysis and healthcare research may have negatively impacted my ability to apply inclusion criteria consistently, especially when studies assessed complex intervention models such as the pharmacist care models I discussed last week that were difficult to categorize.