Beyond classical meta-analysis: Can inadequately reported studies be included?

Drug Discovery Today

Volumn 9, Issue 21, 2004, Pages 924-931

  Robertson, Chris ^a   Idris, Nik Ruzni Nik ^b   Boyle, Peter ^c  

^a Dept Stat Modelling Sci Univ S ^*  (United Kingdom)

^b Scottish Centre for Infection and Environmental Health   (United Kingdom)

^c INTERNATIONAL AGENCY FOR RESEARCH ON CANCER   (France)

Author keywords

Drug Discovery; Multiple imputation; Pharmaceutical Science; Random effects models; Statistical models; Techniques Methods; Variability estimates

Indexed keywords

ALFUZOSIN; FINASTERIDE; PRAZOSIN; SABAL EXTRACT;

ACCURACY; CLINICAL PROTOCOL; CLINICAL TRIAL; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; DATA ANALYSIS; DRUG EFFECT; GENETIC VARIABILITY; HUMAN; HUMAN GENOME; MATHEMATICAL COMPUTING; MEDICAL LITERATURE; META ANALYSIS; PUBLISHING; RANDOMIZATION; REVIEW; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; STATISTICAL MODEL; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE; TECHNIQUE;

CLINICAL TRIALS; HUMANS; META-ANALYSIS; PUBLICATION BIAS; RESEARCH DESIGN;

EID: 6344280202     PISSN: 13596446     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S1359-6446(04)03274-X     Document Type: Review

References (39)

1. Anello C. Emerging and recurrent issues in drug development. Stat. Med. 18:1999;2301-2309
2. Yusuf S. Meta-analysis of randomized trials: looking back and looking ahead. Control. Clin. Trials. 18:1997;594-601
3. Boyle P., et al. Prostate volume predicts outcome of treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia with Finasteride: meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials. Urology. 48:1996;398-405
4. Gotzsche P.C., Olsen O. Is screening for breast cancer with mammography justifiable? Lancet. 355:2000;129-134
5. Olsen O., Gotzsche P.C. Cochrane review on screening for breast cancer with mammography. Lancet. 358:2002;1340-1342
6. Higgins J.P., et al. Meta-analysis of continuous outcome data from individual patients. Stat. Med. 20:2001;2219-2241
7. Dixon-Woods M., et al. Screening for breast cancer with mammography. Lancet. 358:2001;2166-2167
8. Lee J.H., Zukerman D. Screening for breast cancer with mammography. Lancet. 358:2001;2164-2165
9. Miller A.B. Screening for breast cancer with mammography. Lancet. 358:2001;2164-2168
10. Senn S. Screening for breast cancer with mammography. Lancet. 358:2001;2165-2168
11. Thornton H. Screening for breast cancer with mammography. Lancet. 358:2001;2165-2168
12. Stewart L.A., Clarke M.J. Practical methodology of meta-analyses (overviews) using updated individual patient data. Cochrane Working Group. Stat. Med. 14:1995;2057-2079
13. Whitehead A. Meta-Analysis of Controlled Clinical Trials. 2002;Wiley
14. Boyle P., et al. Meta-analysis of clinical trials of Permixon in the treatment of symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia. Urology. 55:2000;533-539
15. Descotes J.L., et al. Placebo-controlled evaluation of the efficacy and tolerability of Permixon® in benign prostatic hyperplasia after exclusion of placebo responders. Clin. Drug Invest. 9:1995;291-297
16. Champault G., et al. A double-blind trial of an extract of the plant Serenoa repens in benign prostatic hyperplasia. Br. J. Clin. Pharmacol. 18:1984;461-462
17. Emili E., et al. Risulti clinici su un nuovo farmaco nella terapia dell'ipertrofia della prostata (Permixon®). Urologia. 50:1983;1042-1049
18. Tasca A., et al. Treatment of obstruction in prostatic adenoma using extract of Serenoa Repens. Double-blind clinical test v. placebo. Minerva Urol. Nefrol. 37:1985;87-91
19. Boccafoschi C., Annoscia S. Comparison of Serenoa Repens extract and placebo in controlled clinical trial in patients with prostatic adenomatosis. Urologia. 50:1983;1-14
20. Reece S.H., et al. The value of Permixon in benign prostatic hypertrophy. Br. J. Urol. 58:1986;36-40
21. Carraro J.C., et al. Comparison of phytotherapy (Permixon) with finasteride in the treatment of benign prostate hyperplasia: a randomized international study of 1,098 patients. Prostate. 29:1996;231-240
22. Grasso M., et al. Comparative effects of alfuzosin versus Serenoa repens in the treatment of symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia. Arch. Esp. Urol. 48:1995;97-103
23. Adriazola Semino M., et al. Symptomatic treatment of benign hypertrophy of the prostate. Comparative study of prazosin and Serenoa repens. Arch. Esp. Urol. 45:1992;211-213
24. Foroutan F. Wirksamkeit und Vertraglichkeit von Permixon® bei einem gröβeren Patientenkollektiv (592 Patienten) unter Praxisbedingungen. Journal für Urologie und Urogynäkologie. 2:1997;17-21
25. Moher D., et al. The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomised trials. Lancet. 357:2001;1191-1194
26. Follmann D., et al. Variance imputation for overviews of clinical trials with continuous response. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 45:1992;769-773
27. Flather M.D., et al. Strengths and limitations of meta-analysis: larger studies may be more reliable. Control. Clin. Trials. 18:1997;568-579
28. Stram D.O. Meta-analysis of published data using a linear mixed effects model. Biometrics. 52:1996;536-544
29. van Houwelingen H.C., et al. Advanced methods in meta-analysis: multivariate approach and meta-regression. Stat. Med. 21:2002;589-624
30. Berkey C.S., et al. Multiple-outcome meta-analysis of clinical trials. Stat. Med. 15:1996;537-557
31. Berkey C.S., et al. Meta-analysis of multiple outcomes by regression with random effects. Stat. Med. 17:1998;2537-2550
32. McAuley L., et al. Does the inclusion of grey literature influence estimates of intervention effectiveness reported in meta-analyses? Lancet. 356:2000;1228-1231
33. Ades A.E. A chain of evidence with mixed comparisons: models for multi-parameter synthesis and consistency of evidence. Stat. Med. 22:2003;2995-3016
34. Moher D., et al. Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement. Quality of reporting of meta-analyses. Lancet. 354:1999;1896-1900
35. Sutton A.J., Abrams K.R. Bayesian methods in meta-analysis and evidence synthesis. Stat. Methods Med. Res. 10:2001;277-303
36. Bryk A.S., Raudenbush S.W. Hierarchical Linear Models. 1992;Sage Publications
37. Woodhouse G., et al. MLn Command Reference. Multilevel Models Project. 1995;Institute of Education, London
38. Higgins J.P., Thompson S.G. Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. Stat. Med. 21:2002;1539-1558
39. Thompson S.G., Higgins J.P. How should meta-regression analyses be undertaken and interpreted? Stat. Med. 21:2002;1559-1573