Literature DB >> 35648746

Assessing and visualizing fragility of clinical results with binary outcomes in R using the fragility package.

Lifeng Lin1, Haitao Chu2,3.   

Abstract

With the growing concerns about research reproducibility and replicability, the assessment of scientific results' fragility (or robustness) has been of increasing interest. The fragility index was proposed to quantify the robustness of statistical significance of clinical studies with binary outcomes. It is defined as the minimal event status modifications that can alter statistical significance. It helps clinicians evaluate the reliability of the conclusions. Many factors may affect the fragility index, including the treatment groups in which event status is modified, the statistical methods used for testing for the association between treatments and outcomes, and the pre-specified significance level. In addition to assessing the fragility of individual studies, the fragility index was recently extended to both conventional pairwise meta-analyses and network meta-analyses of multiple treatment comparisons. It is not straightforward for clinicians to calculate these measures and visualize the results. We have developed an R package called "fragility" to offer user-friendly functions for such purposes. This article provides an overview of methods for assessing and visualizing the fragility of individual studies as well as pairwise and network meta-analyses, introduces the usage of the "fragility" package, and illustrates the implementations with several worked examples.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2022        PMID: 35648746      PMCID: PMC9159630          DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0268754

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  PLoS One        ISSN: 1932-6203            Impact factor:   3.752


  88 in total

1.  Replication validity of genetic association studies.

Authors:  J P Ioannidis; E E Ntzani; T A Trikalinos; D G Contopoulos-Ioannidis
Journal:  Nat Genet       Date:  2001-11       Impact factor: 38.330

2.  Statistical significance and fragility criteria for assessing a difference of two proportions.

Authors:  S D Walter
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  1991       Impact factor: 6.437

3.  Scientists rise up against statistical significance.

Authors:  Valentin Amrhein; Sander Greenland; Blake McShane
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2019-03       Impact factor: 49.962

4.  Meta-analysis in clinical trials.

Authors:  R DerSimonian; N Laird
Journal:  Control Clin Trials       Date:  1986-09

Review 5.  Registration in the international prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO) of systematic review protocols was associated with increased review quality.

Authors:  Sofia Sideri; Spyridon N Papageorgiou; Theodore Eliades
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2018-01-12       Impact factor: 6.437

6.  A critique of the fragility index.

Authors:  Tiago Machado; Gonçalo S Duarte; Nilza Gonçalves; Joaquim J Ferreira; João Costa
Journal:  Lancet Oncol       Date:  2019-09-30       Impact factor: 41.316

7.  Bivariate random effects models for meta-analysis of comparative studies with binary outcomes: methods for the absolute risk difference and relative risk.

Authors:  Haitao Chu; Lei Nie; Yong Chen; Yi Huang; Wei Sun
Journal:  Stat Methods Med Res       Date:  2010-12-21       Impact factor: 3.021

8.  Assessing and visualizing fragility of clinical results with binary outcomes in R using the fragility package.

Authors:  Lifeng Lin; Haitao Chu
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-06-01       Impact factor: 3.752

9.  The fragility of trial results involves more than statistical significance alone.

Authors:  Stephen D Walter; Lehana Thabane; Matthias Briel
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2020-04-13       Impact factor: 7.407

10.  PSYCHOLOGY. Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science.

Authors: 
Journal:  Science       Date:  2015-08-28       Impact factor: 47.728

View more
  1 in total

1.  Assessing and visualizing fragility of clinical results with binary outcomes in R using the fragility package.

Authors:  Lifeng Lin; Haitao Chu
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-06-01       Impact factor: 3.752

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.