Literature DB >> 9483721

Variation in baseline risk as an explanation of heterogeneity in meta-analysis.

S D Walter1.   

Abstract

A relationship of baseline risk to treatment effect size has been suggested as a possible explanation of between-study heterogeneity in meta-analyses. To address this question, we develop regression models to examine the relationship between the logits (or other response measure) in the intervention and control groups. A weighted least squares (WLS) approach is described that allows for the heterogeneous sampling variation in the two groups, together with a correction of the coefficients for sampling error. Two approximate maximum likelihood (ML) solutions are also obtained, with or without an assumption of equal variances between groups within studies. A closed form ML solution exists with the assumption of equal variances. Both methods appear preferable to a previously suggested regression model of the log odds ratio on the control event rate; the methods proposed here use the same scale of measurement for both study groups, and eliminate an artifactual correlation in the regression error structure. The ML approach may be preferable because of its symmetric treatment of study groups, but WLS is more easily implemented with standard software. The methods are illustrated with data from meta-analyses on pre-term delivery and on therapies to lower serum cholesterol.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1997        PMID: 9483721     DOI: 10.1002/(sici)1097-0258(19971230)16:24<2883::aid-sim825>3.0.co;2-b

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


  10 in total

Review 1.  Drug eluting stents: an updated meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

Authors:  C Roiron; P Sanchez; A Bouzamondo; P Lechat; G Montalescot
Journal:  Heart       Date:  2005-10-10       Impact factor: 5.994

2.  Controversy and Debate : Questionable utility of the relative risk in clinical research: Paper 4 :Odds Ratios are far from "portable" - A call to use realistic models for effect variation in meta-analysis.

Authors:  Mengli Xiao; Haitao Chu; Stephen R Cole; Yong Chen; Richard F MacLehose; David B Richardson; Sander Greenland
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2021-08-11       Impact factor: 6.437

Review 3.  Recombinant human follicle-stimulating hormone produces more oocytes with a lower total dose per cycle in assisted reproductive technologies compared with highly purified human menopausal gonadotrophin: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Philippe Lehert; Joan C Schertz; Diego Ezcurra
Journal:  Reprod Biol Endocrinol       Date:  2010-09-16       Impact factor: 5.211

4.  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

Review 5.  Mixing nulliparous and multiparous women in randomised controlled trials of preeclampsia prevention is debatable: evidence from a systematic review.

Authors:  Emmanuel Simon; Agnès Caille; Franck Perrotin; Bruno Giraudeau
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-06-24       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Efficacy and safety of abciximab in diabetic patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention with thienopyridines loading: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Yihua Wu; Yu Shi; Han Wu; Chang Bian; Qian Tang; Geng Xu; Jun Yang
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2011-06-03       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 7.  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

8.  Individual participant data meta-analysis for a binary outcome: one-stage or two-stage?

Authors:  Thomas P A Debray; Karel G M Moons; Ghada Mohammed Abdallah Abo-Zaid; Hendrik Koffijberg; Richard David Riley
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-04-09       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Meta-analysis of breast cancer microarray studies in conjunction with conserved cis-elements suggest patterns for coordinate regulation.

Authors:  David D Smith; Pål Saetrom; Ola Snøve; Cathryn Lundberg; Guillermo E Rivas; Carlotta Glackin; Garrett P Larson
Journal:  BMC Bioinformatics       Date:  2008-01-28       Impact factor: 3.169

10.  Factors explaining the heterogeneity of effects of patient decision aids on knowledge of outcome probabilities: a systematic review sub-analysis.

Authors:  Stephen J Gentles; Dawn Stacey; Carol Bennett; Mohamad Alshurafa; Stephen D Walter
Journal:  Syst Rev       Date:  2013-10-21
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.