scispace - formally typeset
Open AccessJournal ArticleDOI

Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses

TLDR
A new quantity is developed, I 2, which the authors believe gives a better measure of the consistency between trials in a meta-analysis, which is susceptible to the number of trials included in the meta- analysis.
Abstract
Cochrane Reviews have recently started including the quantity I 2 to help readers assess the consistency of the results of studies in meta-analyses. What does this new quantity mean, and why is assessment of heterogeneity so important to clinical practice? Systematic reviews and meta-analyses can provide convincing and reliable evidence relevant to many aspects of medicine and health care.1 Their value is especially clear when the results of the studies they include show clinically important effects of similar magnitude. However, the conclusions are less clear when the included studies have differing results. In an attempt to establish whether studies are consistent, reports of meta-analyses commonly present a statistical test of heterogeneity. The test seeks to determine whether there are genuine differences underlying the results of the studies (heterogeneity), or whether the variation in findings is compatible with chance alone (homogeneity). However, the test is susceptible to the number of trials included in the meta-analysis. We have developed a new quantity, I 2, which we believe gives a better measure of the consistency between trials in a meta-analysis. Assessment of the consistency of effects across studies is an essential part of meta-analysis. Unless we know how consistent the results of studies are, we cannot determine the generalisability of the findings of the meta-analysis. Indeed, several hierarchical systems for grading evidence state that the results of studies must be consistent or homogeneous to obtain the highest grading.2–4 Tests for heterogeneity are commonly used to decide on methods for combining studies and for concluding consistency or inconsistency of findings.5 6 But what does the test achieve in practice, and how should the resulting P values be interpreted? A test for heterogeneity examines the null hypothesis that all studies are evaluating the same effect. The usual test statistic …

read more

Content maybe subject to copyright    Report

Citations
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI

Effect of vitamin D supplementation on muscle strength: a systematic review and meta-analysis

TL;DR: Based on studies included in this systematic review, vitamin D supplementation does not have a significant effect on muscle strength in adults with baseline 25(OH)D >25 nmol/L, however, a limited number of studies demonstrate an increase in proximal muscle strengthIn adults with vitamin D deficiency.
Journal Article

Interventions to improve water quality for preventing diarrhoea (review).

TL;DR: In this article, the authors conducted randomized and quasi-randomized controlled trials comparing interventions aimed at improving the microbiological quality of drinking water with no intervention in children and adults living in settings where diarrhoeal disease is endemic.
Reference EntryDOI

Support surfaces for pressure ulcer prevention

TL;DR: There is insufficient evidence to draw conclusions on the value of seat cushions, limb protectors and various constant low pressure devices as pressure ulcer prevention strategies, although two studies indicated that foam overlays resulted in adverse skin changes.
Journal ArticleDOI

Kangaroo Mother Care and Neonatal Outcomes: A Meta-analysis

TL;DR: Interventions to scale up KMC implementation are warranted following a systematic review and meta-analysis estimating the association between KMC and neonatal outcomes.
Journal ArticleDOI

Quantitative Evaluation of Drug or Device Effects on Ventricular Remodeling as Predictors of Therapeutic Effects on Mortality in Patients With Heart Failure and Reduced Ejection Fraction: A Meta-Analytic Approach

TL;DR: In patients with LVD, short-term trial-level therapeutic effects of a drug or device on LV remodeling are associated with longer-term test-level effects on mortality, and the odds for neutral or favorable effects in the mortality RCTs increased with mean increases in LVEF and with mean decreases in EDV and ESV in the remodeling trials.
References
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI

Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta‐analysis

TL;DR: It is concluded that H and I2, which can usually be calculated for published meta-analyses, are particularly useful summaries of the impact of heterogeneity, and one or both should be presented in publishedMeta-an analyses in preference to the test for heterogeneity.
Journal ArticleDOI

The combination of estimates from different experiments.

TL;DR: The problem of making a combined estimate has been discussed previously by Cochran and Yates and Cochran (1937) for agricultural experiments, and by Bliss (1952) for bioassays in different laboratories as discussed by the authors.
Journal ArticleDOI

Tamoxifen for early breast cancer: An overview of the randomised trials

TL;DR: The absolute improvement in recurrence was greater during the first 5 years, whereas the improvement in survival grew steadily larger throughout the first 10 years, and these benefits appeared to be largely irrespective of age, menopausal status, daily tamoxifen dose, and of whether chemotherapy had been given to both groups.
Journal Article

Tamoxifen for early breast cancer: an overview of the randomised trials. Early Breast Cancer Trialists' Collaborative Group

Anthony Howell
- 16 May 1998 - 
TL;DR: There have been many randomised trials of adjuvant tamoxifen among women with early breast cancer, and an updated overview of their results is presented in this paper, which approximately doubles the amount of evidence from trials of about 5 years of tamoxifier and, taking all trials together, on events occurring more than 5 years after randomisation.
Journal ArticleDOI

Funnel plots for detecting bias in meta-analysis: guidelines on choice of axis.

TL;DR: In this paper, the authors evaluated standard error, precision (inverse of standard error), variance, inverse of variance, sample size and log sample size (vertical axis) and log odds ratio, log risk ratio and risk difference (horizontal axis).
Related Papers (5)