Sensitivity of between-study heterogeneity in meta-analysis: Proposed metrics and empirical evaluation

International Journal of Epidemiology

Volumn 37, Issue 5, 2008, Pages 1148-1157

  Patsopoulos, Nikolaos A ^a   Evangelou, Evangelos ^a   Ioannidis, John P A ^a,b,c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF IOANNINA   (Greece)

^b TUFTS UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^c INSTITUTE OF COMPUTER SCIENCE   (Greece)

Author keywords

Heterogeneity; Meta analysis; Sensitivity analysis; Sequential algorithm

Indexed keywords

ANTICONVULSIVE AGENT; METHADONE; PLACEBO; SOMATOSTATIN DERIVATIVE; TAXANE DERIVATIVE;

ALGORITHM; DATABASE; EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS; META-ANALYSIS; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS;

ALGORITHM; ARTICLE; BREAST CANCER; CLINICAL STUDY; CLINICAL TRIAL; COCHRANE LIBRARY; COMBINATORIAL ALGORITHM; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; CORRELATION COEFFICIENT; DRUG DOSE COMPARISON; DRUG MEGADOSE; ESOPHAGUS VARICES; GENETIC ASSOCIATION; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; LOW DRUG DOSE; META ANALYSIS; OPIATE ADDICTION; POST HOC ANALYSIS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SEIZURE; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; SEQUENTIAL ALGORITHM; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; TRAUMATIC BRAIN INJURY;

ALGORITHMS; DATABASES, GENETIC; HUMANS; META-ANALYSIS AS TOPIC; MODELS, STATISTICAL; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 53349173117     PISSN: 03005771     EISSN: 14643685     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/ije/dyn065     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Lau J, Ioannidis JP, Schmid CH. Summing up evidence: One answer is not always enough. Lancet 1998;351:123-27.
2. Thompson SG. Why sources of heterogeneity in meta-analysis should be investigated. Br Med J 1994;309:1351-55.
3. Egger M, Smith GD, Altman DG. Systematic Reviews in Health care: Meta-analysis in Context. London, UK: BMJ Publishing Group, 2001.
4. Glasziou PP, Sanders SL. Investigating causes of heterogeneity in systematic reviews. Stat Med 2002;21:1503-11.
5. Sutton A, Abrams K, Jones D, Sheldon T, Song F. Methods for Meta-analysis in Medical Research. Chichester, UK: Wiley, 2000.
6. Cochran WG. The combination of estimates from different experiments. Biometrics 1954;10:101-29.
7. Higgins JPT, Thompson SG. Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. Stat Med 2002;21:1539-58.
8. Higgins JPT, Thompson SG, Deeks J, Altman DG. Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. Br Med J 2003;327:557-60.
9. Galbraith RF. A note on graphical presentation of estimated odds ratios from several clinical trials. Stat Med 1988;7:889-94.
10. Baujat B, Mahe C, Pignon JP, Hill C. A graphical method for exploring heterogeneity in meta-analyses: Application to a meta-analysis of 65 trials. Stat Med 2002;21:2641-52.
11. Ioannidis JP, Trikalinos TA, Khoury MJ. Implications of small effect sizes of individual genetic variants on the design and interpretation of genetic association studies of complex diseases. Am J Epidemiol 2006;164:609.
12. Ioannidis JP, Ntzani EE, Trikalinos TA, Contopoulos-Ioannidis DG. Replication validity of genetic association studies. Nat Genet 2001;29:306-9.
13. Schierhout G, Roberts I. Anti-epileptic drugs for preventing seizures following acute traumatic brain injury. The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2001, Issue 4. Art. No.: CD000173, doi: 10.1002/ 14651858.CD000173.
14. Juni P, Altman DG, Egger M. Systematic reviews in health care: Assessing the quality of controlled clinical trials. Br Med J 2001;323 42-46.
15. Faggiano F, Vigna-Taglianti F, Versino E, Lemma P. Methadone maintenance at different dosages for opioid dependence. The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2003, Issue 3. Art. No.: CD002208, doi: 10.1002/ 14651858.CD002208.
16. Ghersi D, Wilcken N, Simes J, Donoghue E. Taxane containing regimens for metastatic breast cancer. The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2005, Issue 2. Art. No.: CD003366.pub2, doi: 10.1002/ 14651858.CD003366.pub2.
17. Götzsche PC, Hróbjartsson A. Somatostatin analogues for acute bleeding oesophageal varices. The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2005, Issue 1. Art. No.: CD000193.pub2, doi: 10.1002/ 14651858.CD000193.pub2.
18. Song F, Sheldon TA, Sutton AJ, Abrams KR, Jones DR. Methods for exploring heterogeneity in meta-analysis. Eval Health Prof 2001; 24:126-51.
19. Hardy RJ, Thompson SG. Detecting and describing heterogeneity in meta-analysis. Stat Med 1998;17:841-56.
20. Schmid CH, Stark PC, Berlin JA, Landais P, Lau J. Metaregression detected associations between heterogeneous treatment effects and study-level, but not patient-level, factors. J Clin Epidemiol 2004;57:683-97.
21. Lambert PC, Sutton AJ, Abrams KR, Jones DR. A comparison of summary patient-level covariates in meta-regression with individual patient data meta-analysis. J Clin Epidemiol 2002;55:86-94.
22. Berlin JA, Santanna J, Schmid CH, Szczech LA, Feldman HI. Anti-lymphocyte antibody induction therapy study group. Individual patient- versus group-level data meta-regressions for the investigation of treatment effect modifiers: Ecological bias rears its ugly head. Stat Med 2002;21:371-87.
23. Petiti DB. Approaches to heterogeneity in meta-analysis. Stat Med 2001;20:3625-33.
24. Higgins JP, Thompson SG. Controlling the risk of spurious findings from meta-regression. Stat Med 2004; 23:1663-82.
25. Simmonds MC, Higgins JP, Stewart LA, Tierney JF, Clarke MJ, Thompson SG. Meta-analysis of individual patient data from randomized trials: A review of methods used in practice. Clin Trials 2005;2 209-17.
26. Engels EA, Schmid CH, Terrin N, Olkin I, Lau J. Heterogeneity and statistical significance in meta-analysis: An empirical study of 125 meta-analyses. Stat. Med 2000;19:1707-28.
27. Huedo-Medina TB, Sanchez-Meca J, Marin-Martinez F, Botella J. Assessing heterogeneity in meta-analysis: Q statistic or I2 index? Psychol Methods 2006;11: 193-206.
28. Ioannidis JP, Patsopoulos NA, Evangelou E. Uncertainty in heterogeneity estimates in meta-analyses. Br Med J 2007;335:914-16.