Literature DB >> 2704896

A comparison of statistical methods for combining event rates from clinical trials.

J A Berlin1, N M Laird, H S Sacks, T C Chalmers.   

Abstract

We compare two statistical methods for combining event rates from several studies. Both methods treat each study as a separate stratum. The Peto-modified Mantel-Haenszel (Peto) method estimates a combined odds ratio assuming homogeneity across strata and provides a test for heterogeneity. The DerSimonian and Laird modified Cochran method (D&L) produces a weighted average of rate differences, where the weights allow for among-study variability. We analyse 22 meta-analyses from ten reports by both methods. The pooled estimates are divided by their standard errors to produce a Z-statistic. A t-test comparing Z-statistics from all 22 studies suggests that the D&L method tends to be more conservative [d(Peto - D&L) = 0.29, t = 2.53, p = 0.02]. For a subset of 14 non-heterogeneous studies, the difference is smaller and non-significant (d = 0.09, t = 0.72, p = 0.49). The results from the methods correlate well (r = 0.66 for all 22 studies, r = 0.95 for 14 non-heterogeneous studies). Thus, the presence of heterogeneity influences our conclusion. We discuss the statistical and scientific implications of these findings.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1989        PMID: 2704896     DOI: 10.1002/sim.4780080202

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


  58 in total

1.  Will eradication of Helicobacter pylori improve symptoms of non-ulcer dyspepsia? Studies included in meta-analysis had heterogenous, not homogenous, results.

Authors:  C Cates
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2000-04-29

2.  Meta-analysis and quality of evidence in the economic evaluation of drug trials.

Authors:  R J Simes; P P Glasziou
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1992-04       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 3.  The potential and limitations of meta-analysis.

Authors:  T D Spector; S G Thompson
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  1991-06       Impact factor: 3.710

Review 4.  Frequency of treatment-effect modification affecting indirect comparisons: a systematic review.

Authors:  Michael Coory; Susan Jordan
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2010       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 5.  Meta-analysis of observational epidemiological studies: a review.

Authors:  D R Jones
Journal:  J R Soc Med       Date:  1992-03       Impact factor: 5.344

6.  Meta-analysis of the influence of MDR1 C3435T polymorphism on digoxin pharmacokinetics and MDR1 gene expression.

Authors:  Balram Chowbay; Huihua Li; Machin David; Yin Bun Cheung; Edmund J D Lee
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2005-08       Impact factor: 4.335

7.  Meta-analyses in cancer clinical trials: principles and pitfalls.

Authors:  J R Benson; K Saeb-Parsy
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2006-07       Impact factor: 3.352

8.  Systematic reviews of meta-analyses: applications and limitations.

Authors:  Miguel Delgado-Rodríguez
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 3.710

Review 9.  Noninvasive ventilation as a weaning strategy for mechanical ventilation in adults with respiratory failure: a Cochrane systematic review.

Authors:  Karen E A Burns; Maureen O Meade; Azra Premji; Neill K J Adhikari
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2013-12-09       Impact factor: 8.262

10.  Meta-analysis of vascular and neoplastic events associated with tamoxifen.

Authors:  R Scott Braithwaite; Rowan T Chlebowski; Joseph Lau; Suzanne George; Rachel Hess; Nananda F Col
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2003-11       Impact factor: 5.128

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.