In a narrative systematic review: is it acceptable to use a scatterplot to visually represent the reported outcomes of the included studies as related to a particular study trait? I assume as there is no summary measure shown in scatterplot it may be acceptable as it is the same data as in a table.
Or would such representation be considered a 'quantitative' synthesis.
Aneesha,
It is said that a picture is worth a thousand words. An appropriate visual would typically be useful.
David
Quantitative changes precede qualitative changes. Visualizing quantities is a very early step, perhaps it leads to a thesis. The synthesis heeds an opponent, that clubs Your thesis.
There is an old tradition: the journal club. You get up late in the morning. Do some lectures and by Your research up to tea time You win a good thesis. You go with a satsfied smile to Your journal club. All Your grudgers will club Your thesis. By this only the stong an viable thesis will esccape from this clubbing.
So go to Your friends and enemies. Here we all are too polite and too decent to club someone. Yet I will give You an advice contray to David: A clear description doesn't need any picture.
Systematic reviews has its own diagrams. Something similar to a scatterplot will be the funnel plot used to assess for publication bias. There are guidelines for narrative synthesis; please see attached Centre for Reviews & Dissemination (CRD) guidelines.
Thank you for the insights and Dr Ababa for sharing the CRD guidelines. My question is regarding the datapoints from outcomes of different studies versus a particular study characteristics. If these ( not summary statistics) are visually represented it would still remain a 'qualitative' summary.
Would it be correct to assume that this is a grey area!
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Medicine
- Physiology
- Biosignals
- Biomedical Signal Processing
- Statistical Analysis