Expressing findings from meta-analyses of continuous outcomes in terms of risks

Statistics in Medicine

Volumn 30, Issue 25, 2011, Pages 2967-2985

  Anzures Cabrera, Judith ^a   Sarpatwari, Ameet ^b   Higgins, Julian Pt ^a  

^a MRC BIOSTATISTICS UNIT   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Continuous outcomes; Interpretation; Meta analysis; Risks; Standardized mean difference

Indexed keywords

PLACEBO; RIVASTIGMINE;

ACCURACY; ALZHEIMER DISEASE; ARTICLE; CLINICAL EFFECTIVENESS; COGNITIVE THERAPY; DEMENTIA; GENERALIZED ANXIETY DISORDER; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MATHEMATICAL COMPUTING; MATHEMATICAL MODEL; MAXIMUM LIKELIHOOD METHOD; META ANALYSIS (TOPIC); OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PREDICTION; PROBABILITY; PROCESS OPTIMIZATION; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK FACTOR; SAMPLE SIZE; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; SIMULATION; STANDARDIZATION; SYSTEMATIC ERROR; VALIDATION PROCESS;

ANXIETY DISORDERS; BEHAVIOR THERAPY; COMPUTER SIMULATION; DATA INTERPRETATION, STATISTICAL; DEMENTIA; HUMANS; META-ANALYSIS AS TOPIC; NEUROPROTECTIVE AGENTS; ODDS RATIO; PHENYLCARBAMATES; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC; RISK; SAMPLE SIZE;

EID: 80054724911     PISSN: 02776715     EISSN: 10970258     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/sim.4298     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Qizilbash N, Whitehead A, Higgins J, Wilcock G, Schneider L, Farlow M. Cholinesterase inhibition for Alzheimer disease: a meta-analysis of the tacrine trials. Journal of the American Medical Association 1998; 280: 1777-1782, DOI: 10.1001/jama.280.20.1777.
2. Moore A, McQuay H, Gavaghan D. Deriving dichotomous outcome measures from continuous data in randomised controlled trials of analgesics. Pain 1996; 66: 229-237, DOI: 10.1016/0304-3959(96)03032-1.
3. Furukawa TA, Cipriani A, Barbui C, Brambilla P, Watanabe N. Imputing response rates from means and standard deviations in meta-analyses. International Clinical Psychopharmacology 2005; 20: 49-52.
4. Cook RJ, Sackett DL. The number needed to treat: a clinically useful measure of treatment effect. BMJ 1995; 310: 452-454.
5. Schünemann HJ, Oxman AD, Higgins JPT, Vist GE, Glasziou P, Guyatt GH. On behalf of the Cochrane Applicability and Recommendations Methods Group and the Cochrane Statistical Methods Group. Presenting results and "Summary of findings" tables, In Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions, Higgins JPT, Green S (eds), Wiley, Chichester, 2008; 335-358.
6. Altman DG, Royston P. The cost of dichotomising continuous variables. BMJ 2006; 332: 1080, DOI: 10.1136/bmj.332.7549.1080.
7. World Health Organization. Obesity: preventing and managing the global epidemic. Report of a WHO Consultation, WHO Technical Report Series 894, Geneva, 2000.
8. Schrag A, Barone P, Brown RG, Leentjens AFG, McDonald WM, Starkstein S, Weintraub D, Poewe W, Rascol O, Sampaio C, Stebbins GT, Goetz CG. Depression rating scales in Parkinson's disease: critique and recommendations. Movement Disorders 2007; 22: 1077-1092, DOI: 10.1002/mds.21333.
9. Deeks JJ, Altman DG, Bradburn MJ. Statistical methods for examining heterogeneity and combining results from several studies in meta-analysis, In Systematic Reviews in Health Care: Meta-analysis in Context, Egger M, Davey Smith G, Altman DG (eds), BMJ Publication Group, London, 2001; 285-312.
10. Suissa S. Binary methods for continuous outcomes-a parametric alternative. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 1991; 44: 241-248, DOI: 10.1016/0895-4356(91)90035-8.
11. Whitehead A, Bailey AJ, Elbourne D. Combining summaries of binary outcomes with those of continuous outcomes in a meta-analysis. Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics 1999; 9: 1-16.
12. Hasselblad V, Hedges LV. Meta-analysis of screening and diagnostic tests. Psychological Bulletin 1995; 117: 167-178, DOI: 10.1037/0033-2909.117.1.167.
13. Chinn S. A simple method for converting an odds ratio to effect size for use in meta-analysis. Statistics in Medicine 2000; 19: 3127-3131, DOI: 10.1002/1097-0258(20001130)19:22<3127::AID-SIM784>3.0.CO;2-M.
14. Cox DR, Snell EJ. Analysis of Binary Data, Chapman and Hall: London, 1989.
15. Higgins JPT, Thompson SG, Spiegelhalter DJ. A re-evaluation of random-effects meta-analysis. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A 2009; 172: 137-159, DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-985X.2008.00552.x.
16. Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Vist GE, Zunz R, Falck-Ytter Y, Alonso-Coello P. Schünemann HJ, GRADE Working Group. GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ 2008; 336: 924-926, DOI: 10.1136/bmj.39489.470347.AD.
17. Birks J, Grimley Evans J, Iakovidou V, Tsolaki M. Rivastigmine for Alzheimer's disease. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2000. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001191. Issue 4, Art No: CD001191.
18. Hunot V, Churchill R, Teixeira V, Silva de Lima M. Psychological therapies for generalised anxiety disorder. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2007. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001848.pub4. Issue 1, Art No: CD001848.
19. Sánchez-Meca J, Marín-Martínez F, Chacón-Moscoso S. Effect-size indices for dichotomized outcomes in meta-analysis. Psychological Methods 2003; 8: 448-467, DOI: 10.1037/1082-989X.8.4.448.