Analysing the Relationship Between Treatment Benefit and Underlying Risk: Precautions and Recommendations

Systematic Reviews in Health Care: Meta-Analysis in Context: Second Edition

Volumn , Issue , 2008, Pages 176-188

  Sharp, Stephen J ^a  

^a GLAXOSMITHKLINE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Clinical practice; Magnesium therapy; Meta analysis; Statistical heterogeneity; Treatment effect

Indexed keywords

EID: 3342949140     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1002/9780470693926.ch10     Document Type: Chapter

References (30)

1. Davey Smith G, Egger M. Who benefits from medical interventions? BMJ 1994;308:72-4.
2. Davey Smith G, Song F, Sheldon T. Cholesterol lowering and mortality: the importance of considering initial level of risk. BMJ 1993;206:1367-73.
3. Brand R, Kragt H. Importance of trends in the interpretation of an overall odds ratio in the meta-analysis of clinical trials. Stat Med 1992;11:2077-82.
4. Boissel J-P, Collet J, Lièvre M, Girard P. An effect model for the assessment of drug benefit: example of antiarrhythmic drugs in postmyocardial infarction patients. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 1993;22:356-63.
5. Antman EM, Lau J, Kupelnick B, Mosteller F, Chalmers TC. A comparison of results of meta-analyses of randomized control trials and recommendations of clinical experts. Treatments for myocardial infarction. JAMA 1992;268:240-8.
6. Lau J, Ioannidis JPA, Schmid CH. Summing up evidence: one answer is not always enough. Lancet 1998;351:123-7.
7. Pagliaro L, D'Amico G, Sørensen T, et al. Prevention of first bleeding in cirrhosis - a meta-analysis of randomized trials of nonsurgical treatment. Ann Intern Med 1992;117:59-70.
8. Bland JM, Altman DG. Regression towards the mean. BMJ 1994;308:1499.
9. Bland JM, Altman DG. Some examples of regression to the mean. BMJ 1994;309:780.
10. Sharp SJ, Thompson SG, Altman DG. The relation between treatment benefit and underlying risk in meta-analysis. BMJ 1996;313:735-8.
11. Hayes R. Methods for assessing whether change depends on initial value. Stat Med 1988;7:915-27.
12. L'Abbé K, Detsky A, O'Rourke K. Meta-analysis in clinical research. Ann Intern Med 1987;107:224-33.
13. Hoes AW, Grobbee DE, Lubsen J. Does drug treatment improve survival? Reconciling the trials in mild-to-moderate hypertension. J Hypertens 1995;13:805-11.
14. Egger M, Davey Smith G. Risks and benefits of treating mild hypertension: a misleading meta-analysis? J Hypertens 1995;13:813-15.
15. Thompson SG, Smith TC, Sharp SJ. Investigating underlying risk as a source of heterogeneity in meta-analysis. Stat Med 1997;16:2741-58.
16. McIntosh M. The population risk as an explanatory variable in research synthesis of clinical trials. Stat Med 1996;15:1713-28.
17. Smith TC, Spiegelhalter DJ, Thomas A. Bayesian approaches to random effects metaanalyses: a comparative study. Stat Med 1995;14:2685-99.
18. DerSimonian R, Laird N. Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Controlled Clin Trials 1986;7:177-88.
19. Armitage P, Berry G. In: Statistical Methods in Medical Research, 3rd edn. Oxford: Blackwell Science, 1994:288-90.
20. Gilks WR, Clayton DG, Spiegelhalter DJ, et al. Modelling complexity: applications of Gibbs sampling in medicine (with discussion). J Roy Stat Soc 1993;55:39-102.
21. Van Houwelingen H., Senn, S. Letter to the editor: investigating underlying risk as a source of heterogeneity in meta-analysis. Stat Med 1999;18:107-13.
22. Thompson SG, Prevost (née Smith) TC, Sharp SJ. Author's reply: investigating underlying risk as a source of heterogeneity in meta-analysis. Stat Med 1999;18:113-15.
23. Gilks WR, Thomas A, Spiegelhalter DJ. A language and program for complex Bayesian modelling. Statistician 1994;43:169-77.
24. Sharp SJ, Thompson SG. Analysing the relationship between treatment effect and underlying risk in meta-analysis: comparison and development of approaches. Stat Med (in press).
25. Blomqvist N. On the relation between change and initial value. J Am Stat Assoc 1977;72:746-9.
26. Senn S. Letter to the editor. Stat Med 1994;13:293-6.
27. Brand R. Importance of trends in the interpretation of an overall odds ratio in a metaanalysis of clinical trials (author's reply). Stat Med 1994;13:295-6.
28. Walter SD. Variation in baseline risk as an explanation of heterogeneity in meta-analysis. Stat Med 1997;16:2883-900.
29. Van Houwelingen H, Zwinderman K, Stijnen T. A bivariate approach to meta-analysis. Stat Med 1993;12:2272-84.
30. Cook RJ, Walter SD. A logistic model for trend in 2×2×K tables with applications to meta-analyses. Biometrics 1997;53:352-7.