OBJECTIVES: To describe past practice in meta-analyses found in occupational epidemiology, identifying the major issues that should be considered by researchers planning a meta-analysis in this setting. METHODS: An electronic search of relevant online databases was undertaken. Papers were included in the review if they contained a statistical synthesis of risks in an occupational health setting. RESULTS: Sixty reports of meta-analyses were identified, mostly in cancer. The number of meta-analyses has increased consistently over the last 20 years. A majority of studies focused on a mean overall effect, although more than half of them also investigated heterogeneity of results. Both fixed effect and random effects meta-analysis models were employed, the former more often, and in eight studies used despite a statistically significant test for heterogeneity. A large proportion of the meta-analyses included different effect measures in the statistical synthesis, for example, including standardized mortality ratios (SMRs) and standardized incidence ratios. Most meta-analyses limited to a single type of effect measure focused on SMRs. The vast majority of meta-analyses combined all studies regardless of variation in the extent of information on exposures. CONCLUSIONS: Meta-analyses in occupational epidemiology should properly explore and incorporate heterogeneity among studies. The meta-SMR is an important construct in this field, evidenced by a large proportion of cohort studies in the meta-analyses we identified. Controversy remains over the definition and validity of the meta-SMR. In addition, several other issues, notably dealing with heterogeneity in exposure, warrant further consideration.
OBJECTIVES: To describe past practice in meta-analyses found in occupational epidemiology, identifying the major issues that should be considered by researchers planning a meta-analysis in this setting. METHODS: An electronic search of relevant online databases was undertaken. Papers were included in the review if they contained a statistical synthesis of risks in an occupational health setting. RESULTS: Sixty reports of meta-analyses were identified, mostly in cancer. The number of meta-analyses has increased consistently over the last 20 years. A majority of studies focused on a mean overall effect, although more than half of them also investigated heterogeneity of results. Both fixed effect and random effects meta-analysis models were employed, the former more often, and in eight studies used despite a statistically significant test for heterogeneity. A large proportion of the meta-analyses included different effect measures in the statistical synthesis, for example, including standardized mortality ratios (SMRs) and standardized incidence ratios. Most meta-analyses limited to a single type of effect measure focused on SMRs. The vast majority of meta-analyses combined all studies regardless of variation in the extent of information on exposures. CONCLUSIONS: Meta-analyses in occupational epidemiology should properly explore and incorporate heterogeneity among studies. The meta-SMR is an important construct in this field, evidenced by a large proportion of cohort studies in the meta-analyses we identified. Controversy remains over the definition and validity of the meta-SMR. In addition, several other issues, notably dealing with heterogeneity in exposure, warrant further consideration.
Authors: Doug King; Patria Hume; Cloe Cummins; Alan Pearce; Trevor Clark; Andrew Foskett; Matt Barnes Journal: Sports Med Date: 2019-10 Impact factor: 11.136