I recently talked with someone doesn't tolerate any meta-analyses because they are too easy to tweak the inclusion/exclusion criteria to the researcher's or backer's liking. (Personally, I wouldn't just hand wave off such research.)
Anyway, are there meta-analysis or systematic reviews that contain multiple sections for different inclusion/exclusion criteria and then discuss the findings for each 'branch' among the other 'branches'? By branches I mean slightly different criteria used.
For example, say a meta-analysis is conducted about the digestibility of a certain food for a specific age range. Then, another meta-analysis is conducted for the same food for a different age range. This is just off the top of my head, but I hope the basic idea is understood. (I do not only mean a meta-analysis or systematic review that analyses different cohorts.)
- Why are meta-analyses the most quoted type of research paper despite being often flawed?
- Why is data falsification reported to be more usual in some fields than others?
- Is it possible to submit a paper to a scholarly, peer-reviewed journal without PhD and get it accepted?
- Can anyone write a paper and then publish it in a journal?