Bivariate random-effects meta-analysis and the estimation of between-study correlation

BMC Medical Research Methodology

Volumn 7, Issue , 2007, Pages

  Riley, Richard D ^a   Abrams, Keith R ^b   Sutton, Alexander J ^b   Lambert, Paul C ^b   Thompson, John R ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LIVERPOOL   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF LEICESTER   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ENZYME; RIBONUCLEOPROTEIN; TELOMERASE; TUMOR MARKER;

ACQUIRED IMMUNE DEFICIENCY SYNDROME; ARTICLE; BIVARIATE ANALYSIS; BIVARIATE RANDOM EFFECT META ANALYSIS; BLADDER CANCER; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER PATIENT; CD4 LYMPHOCYTE COUNT; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONFIDENCE INTERVAL; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; DIAGNOSTIC PROCEDURE; DISEASE MARKER; HUMAN; HUMAN IMMUNODEFICIENCY VIRUS INFECTED PATIENT; HUMAN IMMUNODEFICIENCY VIRUS INFECTION; MATHEMATICAL MODEL; MORTALITY; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SIMULATION; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; STATISTICS; UNIVARIATE ANALYSIS; UNIVARIATE RANDOM EFFECT META ANALYSIS; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; COMPUTER SIMULATION; GENETICS; META ANALYSIS; RANDOMIZATION; THEORETICAL MODEL;

CD4 LYMPHOCYTE COUNT; COMPUTER SIMULATION; HUMANS; META-ANALYSIS; MODELS, GENETIC; MODELS, THEORETICAL; RANDOM ALLOCATION; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TELOMERASE;

EID: 33847074225     PISSN: None     EISSN: 14712288     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/1471-2288-7-3     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Meta-analysis of multiple outcomes by regression with random effects. CS Berkey DC Hoaglin A Antczak-Bouckoms F Mosteller GA Colditz, Stat Med 1998 17 22 2537 2550 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0258(19981130)17:22<2537::AID-SIM953>3.0. CO;2-C 9839346
2. Meta-analysis of multitreatment studies. V Hasselblad, Med Decis Making 1998 18 1 37 43 9456207
3. BJ Becker HEA Tinsley S Brown, Multivariate Meta-analysis San Diego, Academic Press 2000
4. Advanced methods in meta-analysis: multivariate approach and meta-regression. HC Van Houwelingen LR Arends T Stijnen, Stat Med 2002 21 4 589 624 10.1002/sim.1040 11836738
5. Bivariate analysis of sensitivity and specificity produces informative summary measures in diagnostic reviews. JB Reitsma AS Glas AW Rutjes RJ Scholten PM Bossuyt AH Zwinderman, J Clin Epidemiol 2005 58 10 982 990 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2005.02.022 16168343
6. Meta-analysis of genetic studies using Mendelian randomization - a multivariate approach. JR Thompson C Minelli KR Abrams MD Tobin RD Riley, Stat Med 2005 24 14 2241 2254 10.1002/sim.2100 15887296
7. Meta-analysis for the evaluation of potential surrogate markers. MJ Daniels MD Hughes, Stat Med 1997 16 17 1965 1982 10.1002/(SICI)1097- 0258(19970915)16:17<1965::AID-SIM630>3.0.CO;2-M 9304767
8. On meta-analytic assessment of surrogate outcomes. MH Gail R Pfeiffer HC Van Houwelingen RJ Carroll, Biostatistics 2000 1 3 231 246 10.1093/ biostatistics/1.3.231 12933506
9. A Multivariate Mixed Linear Model for Meta-Analysis. HA Kalaian SW Raudenbush, Psychological Methods 1996 1(3) 227 235 10.1037/1082-989X.1.3.227
10. An evaluation of bivariate random-effects meta-analysis for the joint synthesis of two correlated outcomes. RD Riley KR Abrams PC Lambert AJ Sutton JR Thompson, Statistics in Medicine 2007 26 78 97 10.1002/sim.2524 16526010
11. Combining multiple outcome measures in a meta-analysis: an application. LR Arends Z Voko T Stijnen, Stat Med 2003 22 8 1335 1353 10.1002/sim.1370 12687658
12. Bivariate meta-analysis for sensitivity and specificity with sparse data: a generalized linear mixed model approach (letter to the Editor). H Chu SR Cole, Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2006 (in press)
13. Tumor markers in the diagnosis of primary bladder cancer. A systematic review. AS Glas D Roos M Deutekom AH Zwinderman PM Bossuyt KH Kurth, J Urol 2003 169 6 1975 1982 10.1097/01.ju.0000067461.30468.6d 12771702
14. A likelihood approach to meta-analysis with random effects. RJ Hardy SG Thompson, Stat Med 1996 15 6 619 629 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0258(19960330)15: 6<619::AID-SIM188>3.0.CO;2-A 8731004
15. Multivariate meta-analysis. IS Nam K Mengersen P Garthwaite, Stat Med 2003 22 14 2309 2333 10.1002/sim.1410 12854095
16. Generalized least squares for the synthesis of correlated information. A Berrington DR Cox, Biostatistics 2003 4 3 423 431 10.1093/biostatistics/4.3.423 12925509
17. Modeling multivariate effect sizes. SW Raudenbush BJ Becker H Kalaian, Psychological Bulletin 1988 103 1 111 120 10.1037/0033-2909.103.1.111
18. Cholesky Factorization. JE Gentle JE Gentle, Numerical Linear Algebra for Applications in Statistics Berlin, Springer-Verlag 1998 93 95
19. Multivariate meta-analysis with potentially correlated marketing study results. SY Sohn, Naval Research Logistics 2000 47 500 510 10.1002/1520- 6750(200009)47:6<500::AID-NAV3>3.0.CO;2-Z
20. Valid inference in random effects meta-analysis. DA Follmann MA Proschan, Biometrics 1999 55 3 732 737 10.1111/j.0006-341X.1999.00732.x 11315000
21. A unification of models for meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy studies. RM Harbord JJ Deeks M Egger P Whiting JA Sterne, Biostatistics 2006 16698768
22. Campbell Collaboration Statistical Analysis Policy Brief. BJ Becker LV Hedges TD Pigott, A Campbell Collaboration resource document (available at http://wwwcampbellcollaborationorg/ECG/policy_statasp) 2004
23. How does study quality affect the results of a diagnostic meta-analysis? ME Westwood PF Whiting J Kleijnen, BMC Med Res Methodol 2005 5 1 20 15943861 10.1186/1471-2288-5-20
24. A comparison of heterogeneity variance estimators in combining results of studies. K Sidik JN Jonkman, Stat Med (in press)
25. Populating economic decision models using meta-analyses of heterogenously reported studies augmented with expert beliefs. KR Abrams AJ Sutton NJ Cooper MPS Sculpher L Ginlley M Robinson, Technical Report 05-06, Centre for Biostatistics and Genetic Epidemiology, University of Leicester 2005
26. Assessing surrogates as trial endpoints using mixed models. EL Korn PS Albert LM McShane, Stat Med 2005 24 2 163 182 10.1002/sim.1779 15515150
27. Combining individual patient data and aggregate data in evidence synthesis: a systematic review identified current practice and possible methods. RD Riley MP Look MC Simmonds, Journal of Clinical Epidemiology (in press) 2007
28. Meta-analysis using multilevel models with an application to the study of class size effects. H Goldstein M Yang RZ Omar RM Turner SG Thompson, Applied Statistics 2000 49 399 412
29. Sensitivity analyses allowed more appropriate and reliable meta-analysis conclusions for multiple outcomes when missing data was present. RD Riley AJ Sutton KR Abrams PC Lambert, Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2004 57(9) 911 924 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2004.01.018
30. Modelling reporting bias: the operative mortality rate for ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. D Jackson J Copas AJ Sutton, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A 2005 168 737 752
31. Systematic reviews in health care: Investigating and dealing with publication and other biases in meta-analysis. JA Sterne M Egger GD Smith, BMJ 2001 323 7304 101 105 11451790 10.1136/bmj.323.7304.101
32. Assessing the potential for bias in meta-analysis due to selective reporting of subgroup analyses within studies. S Hahn PR Williamson JL Hutton P Garner EV Flynn, Stat Med 2000 19 24 3325 3336 10.1002/1097-0258(20001230)19: 24<3325::AID-SIM827>3.0.CO;2-D 11122498
33. Bias in meta-analysis due to outcome variable selection within studies. JL Hutton PR Williamson, Appl Stat 2000 49 359 370
34. Meta-analysis, funnel plots and sensitivity analysis. J Copas JQ Shi, Biostatistics 2000 1 3 247 262 10.1093/biostatistics/1.3.247 12933507