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
Citations
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
Outcomes of exposure to workplace bullying: A meta-analytic review
TL;DR: In this article, the authors report that exposure to bullying is associated with both job-related and health-and well-being-related outcomes, such as mental and physical health problems, symptoms of post-traumatic stress, burnout, increased intentions to leave, and reduced job satisfaction and organizational commitment.
Journal ArticleDOI
Postmenopausal status and early menopause as independent risk factors for cardiovascular disease: a meta-analysis.
TL;DR: There was no convincing relationship between postmenopausal status and cardiovascular disease, however, there was a modest effect of early menopause on cardiovascular disease.
Journal ArticleDOI
Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Chronic Insomnia: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
TL;DR: A meta-analysis of the efficacy of CBT-i on sleep diary outcomes, compared with control, for the treatment of adults with chronic insomnia is presented.
Journal ArticleDOI
Physical interventions to interrupt or reduce the spread of respiratory viruses.
Tom Jefferson,Chris Del Mar,Liz Dooley,Eliana Ferroni,Lubna A. Al-Ansary,Ghada Bawazeer,Mieke L van Driel,N. Sreekumaran Nair,Mark Jones,Sarah Thorning,John Conly +10 more
TL;DR: The highest quality cluster-RCTs suggest respiratory virus spread can be prevented by hygienic measures, such as handwashing, especially around younger children, as well asSimple and low-cost interventions would be useful for reducing transmission of epidemic respiratory viruses.
Journal ArticleDOI
Interventions to improve water quality for preventing diarrhoea: systematic review and meta-analysis
TL;DR: Significant heterogeneity among the trials suggests that the level of effectiveness may depend on a variety of conditions that research to date cannot fully explain.
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).