Reporting & PRISMA ·
Five Errors That Survive Peer Review
Five consistency errors that get past peer review in published systematic reviews, and the forty-minute pre-submission read that catches each one.
Meridian Research Consultancy
Advanced evidence synthesis for medical, health, nutrition, and exercise science research.
We support international research teams with systematic reviews, meta-analysis, meta-regression, and network meta-analysis for leading peer-reviewed journals.
Why Meridian?
Methodological Independence
We operate as an independent consultancy, ensuring objective analysis free from commercial bias.
Reviewer-Aligned Rigor
Workflows designed backward from the expectations of statistical reviewers at BMC, Frontiers, and Springer.
Transparent Reproducibility
Full access to search strategies, data extraction sheets, and analysis code (R/Stata) for total transparency.
Specialized Services
Systematic Reviews
PRISMA-compliant search, screening, and risk of bias assessment.
Network Meta-Analysis
Advanced Bayesian modeling for comparative effectiveness research.
Meta-Regression
Exploration of heterogeneity sources and effect modifiers.
How an Engagement Works
Every project follows the same milestone-based sequence, so you know what is delivered at each stage and when.
01
Topic and protocol
The research question (PICO) is confirmed, feasibility is checked, and a publication-ready protocol is written and registered.
02
Analysis and drafting
Systematic search, screening, data extraction and statistical analysis, including network meta-analysis or meta-regression, then the full manuscript.
03
Review and refinement
You review the draft, and revisions continue without limit until it is ready for submission.
04
Submission and peer review
Cover letter and submission support, then additional analyses and point-by-point responses to reviewers until a decision.
Who We Serve
We engage exclusively with university-based research teams, clinical research groups, and legitimate academic institutions.
- University Research Labs
- Clinical Trial Groups
- Funded Doctoral Scholars
- Multi-Center Study Teams
Institutional Grade
We prioritize long-term partnerships with research institutions, offering scalable methodological support for complex, multi-study projects.
Latest from Insights
Free methodology notes on the questions statistical reviewers ask most often.
Registration & protocols ·
The Protocol That Contradicts Itself
Ten internal contradictions reviewers spot in registered protocols, why they read as warning signs, and a one-hour check that removes them before you register.
Heterogeneity ·
Zero-Event Trials: What to Add to Nothing
Adding 0.5 to every cell is the default in most software, and it isn't always right. What continuity corrections do to your estimate, and the alternatives.
Network meta-analysis ·
What Is SUCRA? What the Score Can and Cannot Tell You
SUCRA scores network meta-analysis treatments from 0 to 1. What a SUCRA value means, how to interpret it, and why a first-ranked treatment can still mislead.
Registration & protocols ·
Protocol Deviations in Systematic Reviews: What Counts and How to Report Them
Which changes to a registered systematic review protocol count as deviations, which need declaring, and how to report them under PRISMA 2020 item 24c.
Network meta-analysis ·
Transitivity Is an Argument, Not a Test
Statistical tests check consistency. Transitivity is the clinical assumption underneath, and it has to be defended in prose before any network is fitted.
Browse Methods by Topic
- Resources & News on Special Issues2 notes
- Effect Measures1 note
- Bias & quality appraisal5 notes
- Heterogeneity7 notes
- Registration & protocols4 notes
- Searching & screening3 notes
- Network meta-analysis2 notes
- Reporting & PRISMA3 notes
- GRADE & certainty1 note
- Software & tools1 note
- Umbrella reviews1 note
- General Systematic Reviews1 note
- Data extraction1 note
Prefer to do the review yourself? The Guides set out Meridian's working methods step by step. Browse the guides →
Common Questions
- What does Meridian Research Consultancy do?
- Meridian is an independent evidence synthesis consultancy. It conducts systematic reviews and pairwise meta-analysis, meta-regression, Bayesian network meta-analysis and network meta-regression for researchers in the health, medical and exercise sciences, and helps develop and validate review topics.
- Who do you work with?
- University research groups, clinical research teams and hospital research units, funded doctoral and postdoctoral researchers, and multi-centre study teams. Meridian does not take undergraduate assignments or thesis-for-hire requests.
- How long does a systematic review take?
- A full systematic review with meta-analysis typically runs to about sixteen weeks, from protocol registration through searching, screening, extraction, analysis, GRADE and manuscript writing. The How We Work page sets out the timeline week by week.
- Can you guarantee that the paper will be published?
- No honest consultancy can guarantee acceptance, because that decision belongs to the journal and its peer reviewers. Meridian guarantees methodological rigour, transparent reporting, and support with reviewer comments and additional analyses until a final decision is reached, within a three-journal scope.
- Will I receive the search strategy, data and analysis code?
- Yes. Search strategies, data extraction sheets and the analysis code (R or Stata) are handed over with the results, so every number in the manuscript can be reproduced and checked by reviewers.
- Is the review protocol registered?
- Yes. Registration is part of the first milestone: the question is confirmed, feasibility is checked, and the protocol is written and registered, usually on PROSPERO, before screening begins. Most health journals now ask for the registration number at submission.
- Do you run network meta-analysis in a Bayesian or frequentist framework?
- Both are available. Bayesian network meta-analysis is the standard offering, with consistency and inconsistency models, SUCRA or P-score rankings, node-splitting checks and sensitivity analyses under different priors. A frequentist analysis is used where the question or the target journal calls for it.
- Which journals is the work prepared for?
- Workflows are designed backward from the expectations of statistical reviewers at publishers such as BMC, Frontiers and Springer, with Q1 and Q2 journals in medical, health and exercise science as the usual targets. The target journal is agreed at the start, since it shapes reporting requirements.
- Can I conduct the review myself with your help?
- Yes. The Insights notes are free methodology explainers on registration, heterogeneity, bias and reporting, and the Guides set out Meridian's working methods step by step for researchers doing the synthesis themselves.