Literature DB >> 26303591

Meta-analysis of studies with bivariate binary outcomes: a marginal beta-binomial model approach.

Yong Chen1, Chuan Hong2, Yang Ning3, Xiao Su2.   

Abstract

When conducting a meta-analysis of studies with bivariate binary outcomes, challenges arise when the within-study correlation and between-study heterogeneity should be taken into account. In this paper, we propose a marginal beta-binomial model for the meta-analysis of studies with binary outcomes. This model is based on the composite likelihood approach and has several attractive features compared with the existing models such as bivariate generalized linear mixed model (Chu and Cole, 2006) and Sarmanov beta-binomial model (Chen et al., 2012). The advantages of the proposed marginal model include modeling the probabilities in the original scale, not requiring any transformation of probabilities or any link function, having closed-form expression of likelihood function, and no constraints on the correlation parameter. More importantly, because the marginal beta-binomial model is only based on the marginal distributions, it does not suffer from potential misspecification of the joint distribution of bivariate study-specific probabilities. Such misspecification is difficult to detect and can lead to biased inference using currents methods. We compare the performance of the marginal beta-binomial model with the bivariate generalized linear mixed model and the Sarmanov beta-binomial model by simulation studies. Interestingly, the results show that the marginal beta-binomial model performs better than the Sarmanov beta-binomial model, whether or not the true model is Sarmanov beta-binomial, and the marginal beta-binomial model is more robust than the bivariate generalized linear mixed model under model misspecifications. Two meta-analyses of diagnostic accuracy studies and a meta-analysis of case-control studies are conducted for illustration.
Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Keywords:  Sarmanov family; bivariate beta-binomial model; composite likelihood; marginal model; meta-analysis

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26303591      PMCID: PMC5789784          DOI: 10.1002/sim.6620

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Stat Med        ISSN: 0277-6715            Impact factor:   2.373


  34 in total

1.  Bayesian analysis on meta-analysis of case-control studies accounting for within-study correlation.

Authors:  Yong Chen; Haitao Chu; Sheng Luo; Lei Nie; Sining Chen
Journal:  Stat Methods Med Res       Date:  2011-12-04       Impact factor: 3.021

2.  Pseudo-likelihood methods for longitudinal binary data with non-ignorable missing responses and covariates.

Authors:  Michael Parzen; Stuart R Lipsitz; Garrett M Fitzmaurice; Joseph G Ibrahim; Andrea Troxel
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2006-08-30       Impact factor: 2.373

3.  Predicting renal graft failure using multivariate longitudinal profiles.

Authors:  Steffen Fieuws; Geert Verbeke; Bart Maes; Yves Vanrenterghem
Journal:  Biostatistics       Date:  2007-12-03       Impact factor: 5.899

4.  Random-effects models for multivariate repeated measures.

Authors:  S Fieuws; Geert Verbeke; G Molenberghs
Journal:  Stat Methods Med Res       Date:  2007-07-26       Impact factor: 3.021

5.  Aberrant crypt foci and semiparametric modeling of correlated binary data.

Authors:  Tatiyana V Apanasovich; David Ruppert; Joanne R Lupton; Natasa Popovic; Nancy D Turner; Robert S Chapkin; Raymond J Carroll
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2007-08-28       Impact factor: 2.571

6.  Meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy studies accounting for disease prevalence: alternative parameterizations and model selection.

Authors:  Haitao Chu; Lei Nie; Stephen R Cole; Charles Poole
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2009-08-15       Impact factor: 2.373

7.  Bivariate random-effects meta-analysis of sensitivity and specificity with SAS PROC GLIMMIX.

Authors:  J Menke
Journal:  Methods Inf Med       Date:  2009-11-20       Impact factor: 2.176

8.  Random Effects Models in a Meta-Analysis of the Accuracy of Two Diagnostic Tests Without a Gold Standard.

Authors:  Haitao Chu; Sining Chen; Thomas A Louis
Journal:  J Am Stat Assoc       Date:  2009-06-01       Impact factor: 5.033

9.  Contemporary diagnostic imaging modalities for the staging and surveillance of melanoma patients: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Yan Xing; Yulia Bronstein; Merrick I Ross; Robert L Askew; Jeffrey E Lee; Jeffrey E Gershenwald; Richard Royal; Janice N Cormier
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2010-11-16       Impact factor: 13.506

10.  Linear mixed models for longitudinal shape data with applications to facial modeling.

Authors:  Sarah J E Barry; Adrian W Bowman
Journal:  Biostatistics       Date:  2008-02-05       Impact factor: 5.899

View more
  4 in total

1.  Oral pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) to prevent HIV: a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical effectiveness, safety, adherence and risk compensation in all populations.

Authors:  Eamon O Murchu; Liam Marshall; Conor Teljeur; Patricia Harrington; Catherine Hayes; Patrick Moran; Mairin Ryan
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2022-05-11       Impact factor: 3.006

2.  A Bayesian approach for correcting exposure misclassification in meta-analysis.

Authors:  Qinshu Lian; James S Hodges; Richard MacLehose; Haitao Chu
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2018-09-24       Impact factor: 2.373

Review 3.  Application of the Marginal Beta-Binomial Model in Estimation the Overall Odds of Obesity Among Iranian Adults: Meta-Analysis Method.

Authors:  Atefeh Zeinolabedini; Akbar Biglarian; Behjat Seifi; Enayatollah Bakhshi
Journal:  Int J Endocrinol Metab       Date:  2018-01-02

4.  Meta-analysis with zero-event studies: a comparative study with application to COVID-19 data.

Authors:  Jia-Jin Wei; En-Xuan Lin; Jian-Dong Shi; Ke Yang; Zong-Liang Hu; Xian-Tao Zeng; Tie-Jun Tong
Journal:  Mil Med Res       Date:  2021-07-03
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.