Evaluation of old and new tests of heterogeneity in epidemiologic meta- analysis

American Journal of Epidemiology

Volumn 150, Issue 2, 1999, Pages 206-215

  Takkouche, Bahi ^a   Cadarso Suárez, Carmen ^a   Spiegelman, Donna ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SANTIAGO DE COMPOSTELA   (Spain)

^b HARVARD SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

Author keywords

Epidemiologic methods; Heterogeneity; Meta analysis; Models, statistical; Significance tests

Indexed keywords

ANALYTICAL ERROR; ARTICLE; DECISION MAKING; EPIDEMIOLOGY; HYPOTHESIS; META ANALYSIS; OBSERVATION; RISK; SIMULATION; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; VARIANCE;

EID: 0344223296     PISSN: 00029262     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a009981     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Colditz GA, Burdick E, Mosteller F. Heterogeneity in metaanalysis of data from epidemiologic studies: a commentary. Am J Epidemiol 1995;142:371-82.
2. Berlin JA. Invited commentary: benefits of heterogeneity in meta-analysis of data from epidemiologic studies. Am J Epidemiol 1995;142:383-7.
3. Walker AM, Martin-Moreno JM, Artalejo FR. Odd man out: a graphical approach to meta-analysis. Am J Public Health 1988; 78:961-6.
4. National Research Council. Combining information: statistical issues and opportunities for research. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1992:52.
5. Rothman KJ. A show of confidence. (Editorial). N Engl J Med 1978;299:1362-3.
6. Strain DO. Meta-analysis of published data using a linear mixed-effects model. Biometrics 1996;52:536-44.
7. Fleiss JL. The statistical basis of meta-analysis. Stat Methods Med Res 1993;2:121-45.
8. Mantel N, Haenszel W. Statistical aspects of the analysis of data from retrospective studies of disease. J Natl Cancer Inst 1959;22:719-48.
9. Yusuf S, Peto R, Lewis J, et al. Beta blockade during and after myocardial infarction: an overview of the randomized trials. Prog Cardiovasc Dis 1985;27:335-71.
10. DerSimonian R, Laird N. Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Controlled Clin Trials 1986;7:177-88.
11. Cochran WG. The combination of estimates from different experiments. Biometrics 1954;10:101-29.
12. Lipsitz SR, Dear KB, Laird NM, et al. Tests for homogeneity of the risk difference when data are sparse. Biometrics 1998; 54:148-60.
13. Stram DO, Lee JW. Variance components testing in the longitudinal mixed effects model. Biometrics 1994;50:1171-7.
14. Mortimer JA, van Duijn CM, Chandra V, et al. Head trauma as a risk factor for Alzheimer's disease: a collaborative reanalysis of case-control studies. EURODEM Risk Factors Research Group. Int J Epidemiol 1991;20(suppl 2):S28-35.
15. Everhart J, Wright D. Diabetes mellitus as a risk factor for pancreatic cancer: a meta-analysis. JAMA 1995;273:1605-9.
16. Gerstein HC. Cow's milk exposure and type I diabetes mellitus: a critical overview of the clinical literature. Diabetes Care 1994;17:13-19.
17. Spector TD, Hochberg MC. The protective effect of the oral contraceptive pill on rheumatoid arthritis: an overview of the analytic epidemiological studies using meta-analysis. J Clin Epidemiol 1990;43:1221-30.
18. Romieu I, Berlin JA, Colditz G. Oral contraceptives and breast cancer: review and meta-analysis. Cancer 1990;66:2253-63.
19. Emerson JD, Hoaglin DC, Mosteller F. A modified random-effect procedure for combining risk differences in sets of 2 × 2 tables from clinical trials. J Ital Stat Soc 1993;2:169-90.
20. Efron B, Tibshirani RJ. An introduction to the bootstrap. New York, NY: Chapman and Hall, 1993.
21. Berkey CS, Hoaglin DC, Mosteller F, et al. A random effects regression model for meta-analysis. Stat Med 1995;14:395-411.