Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses
Reads0
Chats0
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
Citations
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
Behavioral activation treatments of depression: A meta-analysis.
TL;DR: In this article, a meta-analysis of randomized effect studies of activity scheduling was conducted and the pooled effect size indicating the difference between these two types of treatment was 0.87 (95% CI: 0.60~1.15).
Journal ArticleDOI
Fear in animals: a meta-analysis and review of risk assessment
TL;DR: It is found that selection generally acts on prey to be sensitive to predator behaviour, as well as on prey for modify their behaviour and morphology, which results in a unique perspective on the coevolution of predator and anti-predator behaviour.
Journal ArticleDOI
A meta-analysis of cognitive-behavioural therapy for adult depression, alone and in comparison with other treatments.
Pim Cuijpers,Matthias Berking,Gerhard Andersson,Leanne Quigley,Annet Kleiboer,Keith S. Dobson +5 more
TL;DR: There is no doubt that CBT is an effective treatment for adult depression, although the effects may have been overestimated until now.
Journal ArticleDOI
Effect of obesity on survival of women with breast cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis
TL;DR: There is currently no evidence that weight loss after diagnosis improves survival in newly diagnosed breast cancer patients, and further research should concentrate on assessing whether factors such as diabetes or type of chemotherapy modify the obesity effect and on understanding the causal mechanism.
Journal ArticleDOI
Delayed reward discounting and addictive behavior: a meta-analysis
James MacKillop,James MacKillop,Michael Amlung,Lauren R. Few,Lara A. Ray,Lawrence H. Sweet,Marcus R. Munafò +6 more
TL;DR: These results provide strong evidence of greater DRD in individuals exhibiting addictive behavior in general and particularly in individuals who meet criteria for an addictive disorder.
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
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).