Commentary: Which meta-analyses are conclusive?

International Journal of Epidemiology

Volumn 38, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 298-303

  Nüesch, Eveline ^a,b   Jüni, Peter ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BERN   (Switzerland)

^b UNIVERSITY OF BERN   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

MAGNESIUM;

ACCURACY; ACUTE HEART INFARCTION; CLINICAL EFFECTIVENESS; CLINICAL TRIAL; EFFECT SIZE; HUMAN; INTERVENTION STUDY; MORTALITY; NOTE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUBLISHING; RISK REDUCTION; SAMPLE SIZE; SEQUENTIAL ANALYSIS; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; SYSTEMATIC ERROR; TREATMENT RESPONSE;

DATA INTERPRETATION, STATISTICAL; FALSE POSITIVE REACTIONS; HUMANS; META-ANALYSIS AS TOPIC; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC; SAMPLE SIZE;

EID: 60149103130     PISSN: 03005771     EISSN: 14643685     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/ije/dyn265     Document Type: Note

References (24)

1. Teo KK, Yusuf S, Collins R, Held PH, Peto R. Effects of intravenous magnesium in suspected acute myocardial infarction: Overview of randomised trials. Br Med J 1991;303:1499-503.
2. Yusuf S, Teo K, Woods K. Intravenous magnesium in acute myocardial infarction. An effective, safe, simple, and inexpensive intervention. Circulation 1993;87:2043-46.
3. Woods KL, Fletcher S, Roffe C, Haider Y. Intravenous magnesium sulphate in suspected acute myocardial infarction: Results of the second Leicester Intravenous Magnesium Intervention Trial (LIMIT-2). Lancet 1992;339:1553-58.
4. ISIS-4 (Fourth International Study of Infarct Survival) Collaborative Group. ISIS-4: A randomised factorial trial assessing early oral captopril, oral mononitrate, and intravenous magnesium sulphate in 58 050 patients with suspected acute myocardial infarction. Lancet 1995;345:669-85.
5. Egger M, Davey Smith G. Misleading meta-analysis. Br Med J 1995; 310:752-54.
6. Easterbrook PJ, Berlin JA, Gopalan R, Matthews DR. Publication bias in clinical research. Lancet 1991; 337:867-72.
7. Egger M, Davey Smith G, Schneider M, Minder C. Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. BMJ 1997;315:629-34.
8. Pogue J, Yusuf S. Overcoming the limitations of current meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Lancet 1998;351:47-52.
9. Pogue JM, Yusuf S. Cumulating evidence from randomized trials: Utilizing sequential monitoring boundaries for cumulative meta-analysis. Control Clin Trials 1997; 18:580-93; discussion 661-66.
10. Armitage P. Sequential analysis in therapeutic trials. Annu Rev Med 1969;20:425-30.
11. Pocock S. Group sequential methods in the design and analysis of clinical trials. Biometrika 1977;64:191-99.
12. Lan K, DeMets D. Discrete sequential boundaries for clinical trials. Biometrika 1983;70:659-63.
13. O'Brien PC, Fleming TR. A multiple testing procedure for clinical trials. Biometrics 1979;35:549-56.
14. Egger M, Davey Smith G, Sterne JA. Meta-analysis: Is moving the goal post the answer? Lancet 1998;351: 1517.
15. Wetterslev J, Thorlund K, Brok J, Gluud C. Trial sequential analysis may establish when firm evidence is reached in cumulative meta-analysis. J Clin Epidemiol 2008;61:64-75.
16. Brok J, Thorlund K, Wetterslev J, Gluud C. Apparently conclusive meta-analyses may be inconclusive - trial sequential analysis adjustment of random error risk due to repetitive testing of accumulating data in apparently conclusive neonatal meta-analyses. Int J Epidemiol 2009;38:287-98.
17. Thorlund K, Devereaux PJ, Wetterslev J et al. Can trial sequential monitoring boundaries reduce spurious inferences from meta-analyses? Int J Epidemiol 2009; 38:276-86.
18. Wood L, Egger M, Gluud LL et al. Empirical evidence of bias in treatment effect estimates in controlled trials with different interventions and outcomes: Meta-epidemiological study. Br Med J 2008;336:601-05.
19. Chan AW, Hrobjartsson A, Haahr MT, Gøtzsche PC, Altman DG. Empirical evidence for selective reporting of outcomes in randomized trials: comparison of protocols to published articles. JAMA 2004;291 2457-65.
20. Dwan K, Altman DG, Arnaiz JA et al. Systematic review of the empirical evidence of study publication bias and outcome reporting bias. PLoS ONE 2008;3:e3081.
21. Sterne JA, Egger M. Funnel plots for detecting bias in meta-analysis: guidelines on choice of axis. J Clin Epidemiol 2001;54 1046-55.
22. Jüni P, Altman DG, Egger M. Systematic reviews in health care: assessing the quality of controlled clinical trials. Br Med J 2001;323:42-46.
23. Harbord RM, Egger M, Sterne JA. A modified test for small-study effects in meta-analyses of controlled trials with binary endpoints. Stat Med 2006;25:3443-57.
24. Li J, Zhang Q, Zhang M, Egger M. Intravenous magnesium for acute myocardial infarction. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2007:CD002755.