Literature DB >> 8870154

The population risk as an explanatory variable in research synthesis of clinical trials.

M W McIntosh1.   

Abstract

The population risk, for example the control group mortality rate, is an aggregate measurement of many important attributes of a clinical trial, such as the general health of the patients treated and the experience of the staff performing the trial. Plotting measurements of the population risk against the treatment effect estimates for a group of clinical trials may reveal an apparent association, suggesting that differences in the population risk might explain heterogeneity in the results of clinical trials. In this paper we consider using estimates of population risk to explain treatment effect heterogeneity, and show that using these estimates as fixed covariates will result in bias. This bias depends on the treatment effect and population risk definitions chosen, and the magnitude of measurement errors. To account for the effect of measurement error, we represent clinical trials in a bivariate two-level hierarchical model, and show how to estimate the parameters of the model by both maximum likelihood and Bayes procedures. We use two examples to demonstrate the method.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8870154     DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0258(19960830)15:16<1713::AID-SIM331>3.0.CO;2-D

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


  12 in total

Review 1.  Magnesium in acute myocardial infarction: scientific, statistical, and economic rationale for its use.

Authors:  E M Antman; M S Seelig; K Fleischmann; J Lau; K Kuntz; C S Berkey; M W McIntosh
Journal:  Cardiovasc Drugs Ther       Date:  1996-07       Impact factor: 3.727

2.  A meta-analysis to assess the incidence of adverse effects associated with the transdermal nicotine patch.

Authors:  S Greenland; M H Satterfield; S F Lanes
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  1998-04       Impact factor: 5.606

3.  Commentary: On Effect Measures, Heterogeneity, and the Laws of Nature.

Authors:  Orestis A Panagiotou; Thomas A Trikalinos
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  2015-09       Impact factor: 4.822

4.  Interpreting meta-regression: application to recent controversies in antidepressants' efficacy.

Authors:  Eva Petkova; Thaddeus Tarpey; Lei Huang; Liping Deng
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2013-02-25       Impact factor: 2.373

Review 5.  Rigorous control conditions diminish treatment effects in weight loss-randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  J A Dawson; K A Kaiser; O Affuso; G R Cutter; D B Allison
Journal:  Int J Obes (Lond)       Date:  2015-10-09       Impact factor: 5.095

6.  Controversy and Debate: Questionable utility of the relative risk in clinical research: Paper 2: Is the Odds Ratio "portable" in meta-analysis? Time to consider bivariate generalized linear mixed model.

Authors:  Mengli Xiao; Yong Chen; Stephen R Cole; Richard F MacLehose; David B Richardson; Haitao Chu
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2021-08-09       Impact factor: 6.437

7.  Evidence synthesis for decision making 3: heterogeneity--subgroups, meta-regression, bias, and bias-adjustment.

Authors:  Sofia Dias; Alex J Sutton; Nicky J Welton; A E Ades
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2013-07       Impact factor: 2.583

8.  A double SIMEX approach for bivariate random-effects meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy studies.

Authors:  Annamaria Guolo
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2017-01-11       Impact factor: 4.615

9.  Most published meta-regression analyses based on aggregate data suffer from methodological pitfalls: a meta-epidemiological study.

Authors:  Michael Geissbühler; Cesar A Hincapié; Peter Jüni; Bruno R da Costa; Soheila Aghlmandi; Marcel Zwahlen
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2021-06-15       Impact factor: 4.615

Review 10.  Investigating clinical heterogeneity in systematic reviews: a methodologic review of guidance in the literature.

Authors:  Joel J Gagnier; David Moher; Heather Boon; Joseph Beyene; Claire Bombardier
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2012-07-30       Impact factor: 4.615

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.