{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.025423728813559324, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.221052631578948, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
[How to interpret meta-analyses: A recipe for interpretation of the methodology used in the meta-analyses conducted on cardiovascular risk factors in Turkey].

Meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials are increasingly performed to obtain more precise results. On the other hand, meta-analyses of prevalence studies are relatively rarely performed. In this review, some important points for interpretation of meta-analyses are given along with the comments on the meta-analyses of prevalence studies that are published in this issue of The Archives of The Turkish Society of Cardiology.