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
Cumulative meta-analysis of interleukins 6 and 1β, tumour necrosis factor α and C-reactive protein in patients with major depressive disorder
Rita Haapakoski,Rita Haapakoski,Rita Haapakoski,Julia Mathieu,Klaus P. Ebmeier,Harri Alenius,Mika Kivimäki +6 more
TL;DR: This meta-analysis confirms a robust link between IL-6, CRP and major depression and the role of TNF-α and IL-1β in major depression remains uncertain.
Journal ArticleDOI
Long term pharmacotherapy for obesity and overweight: updated meta-analysis
TL;DR: Orlistat, sibutramine, and rimonabant modestly reduce weight, have differing effects on cardiovascular risk profiles, and have specific adverse effects.
Journal ArticleDOI
Increased local recurrence and reduced survival from colorectal cancer following anastomotic leak: systematic review and meta-analysis.
Alex H. Mirnezami,Reza Mirnezami,Kandiah Chandrakumaran,Kishore Sasapu,Peter M. Sagar,Paul J. Finan +5 more
TL;DR: AL has a negative prognostic impact on local recurrence after restorative resection of rectal cancer and a significant association between colorectal AL and reduced long-term cancer specific survival was also noted.
Journal ArticleDOI
The impact of guidance on Internet-based mental health interventions — A systematic review
TL;DR: In this article, the impact of guidance on the efficacy of Internet-based interventions was systematically reviewed and a systematic search of MEDLINE, CENTRAL and PsycINFO, PsycARTICLES and Psyndex (search date 4th June 2013) was conducted.
Journal ArticleDOI
Reducing Uncertainties About the Effects of Chemoradiotherapy for Cervical Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Individual Patient Data From 18 Randomized Trials
Claire L Vale,Jayne F. Tierney,Lesley A. Stewart,Mark F. Brady,Ketayun A. Dinshaw,Anders Jakobsen,Mahesh K. B. Parmar,Gillian Thomas,Ted Trimble,David S. Alberts,Hongwei Chen,Slobodan Cikaric,Patricia J. Eifel,Melahat Garipagaoglu,Henry M. Keys,Nermina Kantardzic,Punita Lal,Rachelle Lanciano,Felix Leborgne,Vicharn Lorvidhaya,Hiroshi Onishi,Robert Pearcey,E Pras,Kenneth B. Roberts,Peter G. Rose,Charles W. Whitney +25 more
TL;DR: These results endorse the recommendations of the NCI alert, but also demonstrate their applicability to all women and a benefit of non-platinum-based chemoradiotherapy.
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).