Literature DB >> 3616288

Inter-study differences: how should they influence the interpretation and analysis of results?

K R Bailey.   

Abstract

In determining the role inter-study variation should play in an overview analysis, it is important to consider three factors: which question one is trying to answer; the degree of similarity or dissimilarity of design, and the degree to which heterogeneity of outcomes can be explained. Three questions one might be interested in are: whether treatment can be effective in some circumstances; whether treatment is effective on average, and whether treatment was effective on average in the trials at hand. Under the assumption of no qualitative interaction, the answers to these questions coincide. The O-E analysis most directly answers the third question. Other analyses are suggested when the first question is of interest, using the aspirin post-MI studies as an example.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1987        PMID: 3616288     DOI: 10.1002/sim.4780060327

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


  13 in total

Review 1.  Does vitamin D supplementation alleviate chronic nonspecific musculoskeletal pain? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  M Gaikwad; S Vanlint; M Mittinity; G L Moseley; N Stocks
Journal:  Clin Rheumatol       Date:  2016-02-09       Impact factor: 2.980

2.  The effectiveness of asulam for bracken (Pteridium aquilinum) control in the United Kingdom: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Gavin B Stewart; Andrew S Pullin; Claire Tyler
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2007-09-28       Impact factor: 3.266

Review 3.  Application of meta-analysis in reviewing occupational cohort studies.

Authors:  O Wong; G K Raabe
Journal:  Occup Environ Med       Date:  1996-12       Impact factor: 4.402

4.  Is there a valid association between skin tags and colonic polyps: insights from a quantitative and methodologic analysis of the literature.

Authors:  K Radack; S Park
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  1993-08       Impact factor: 5.128

Review 5.  Why sources of heterogeneity in meta-analysis should be investigated.

Authors:  S G Thompson
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1994-11-19

6.  Mentoring Programs to Affect Delinquency and Associated Outcomes of Youth At-Risk: A Comprehensive Meta-Analytic Review.

Authors:  Patrick H Tolan; David B Henry; Michael S Schoeny; Peter Lovegrove; Emily Nichols
Journal:  J Exp Criminol       Date:  2014-06-01

Review 7.  Partial protection against 2009 pandemic influenza A (H1N1) of seasonal influenza vaccination and related regional factors: Updated systematic review and meta-analyses.

Authors:  Zhi-yuan Li; Jin-yan Chen; Yan-ling Zhang; Wei-ming Fu
Journal:  Hum Vaccin Immunother       Date:  2015       Impact factor: 3.452

8.  Evaluation of the United States Department Of Agriculture Northeast Area-wide Tick Control Project by meta-analysis.

Authors:  Brandon Brei; John S Brownstein; John E George; J Mathews Pound; J Allen Miller; Thomas J Daniels; Richard C Falco; Kirby C Stafford; Terry L Schulze; Thomas N Mather; John F Carroll; Durland Fish
Journal:  Vector Borne Zoonotic Dis       Date:  2009-08       Impact factor: 2.133

9.  The Oxford Implementation Index: a new tool for incorporating implementation data into systematic reviews and meta-analyses.

Authors:  Paul Montgomery; Kristen Underhill; Frances Gardner; Don Operario; Evan Mayo-Wilson
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2013-08       Impact factor: 6.437

10.  A re-evaluation of random-effects meta-analysis.

Authors:  Julian P T Higgins; Simon G Thompson; David J Spiegelhalter
Journal:  J R Stat Soc Ser A Stat Soc       Date:  2009-01       Impact factor: 2.483

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.