Name two different methods for evaluating evidence. Compare and contrast these two methods.
Evaluating evidence different methods: There are several methods of evaluating evidence methods are present, but the two most common methods of evaluating evidence are Meta-Analyses and Systematic Reviews. These two methods can help in the determination of the relevance and validity of the evidence. During the evaluating evidences both these systematic reviews and meta-analyses methods aswellas similar and different.
Both the Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses are considered the highest quality of evidence for clinical decision making and can be used above all the other methods of evaluating evidence.
Both the methods for evaluating evidence are similar because they involve the collection of data from different sources and summarizing the all the evidence and results of the studies.
While systematic review collects and summarizes all the empirical evidence, the meta-analysis uses statistical methods to summarize the results of the studies.
Second, Meta-analysis is a statistical method used to combine the numerical results from such studies, if it is possible to do. On the other hand, Systematic review is a formal, systematic and structured approach to review all the relevant literature on a topic.
Third, the rationale for Meta-analysis is that through the combination of samples from different studies the overall sample size is increased, while the rationale for systematic reviews is that when data is pooled together from different sources a greater reliability would be obtained.
Using 200-300 words APA format with at least two references. Sources must be published within the last 5 years.