Robust meta-analytic conclusions mandate the provision of prediction intervals in meta-analysis summaries

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

Volumn 65, Issue 5, 2012, Pages 503-510

  Graham, Petra L ^a   Moran, John L ^b  

^a MACQUARIE UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

^b QUEEN ELIZABETH HOSPITAL   (Australia)

Author keywords

Bayesian analysis; Frequentist analysis; Meta analysis; Posterior probability; Prediction intervals; Predictive distribution; Random effects

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BAYES THEOREM; BIOMETRY; CONFIDENCE INTERVAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; EPIDEMIOLOGICAL DATA; HUMAN; INTENSIVE CARE; MEDLINE; META ANALYSIS (TOPIC); OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROBABILITY; RANDOM SAMPLE; RISK; RISK FACTOR; UNCERTAINTY; EPIDEMIOLOGY; META ANALYSIS; RESEARCH; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; STATISTICS;

BAYES THEOREM; CRITICAL CARE; DATA INTERPRETATION, STATISTICAL; EPIDEMIOLOGIC STUDIES; HUMANS; META-ANALYSIS AS TOPIC; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); RESEARCH REPORT; STATISTICS AS TOPIC;

EID: 84861114064     PISSN: 08954356     EISSN: 18785921     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2011.09.012     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Moher D, Tetzlaff J, Tricco AC, Sampson M, Altman DG. Epidemiology and reporting characteristics of systematic reviews. PLoS Med 2007;4:e78.
2. Thompson SG, Pocock SJ. Can meta-analyses be trusted? Lancet 1991;338:1127-30.
3. Borzak S, Ridker PM. Discordance between meta-analyses and large-scale randomized, controlled trials. Examples from the management of acute myocardial infarction. Ann Intern Med 1995; 123:873-7.
4. Cappelleri JC, Ioannidis JP, Schmid CH, de Ferranti SD, Aubert M, Chalmers TC, et al. Large trials vs meta-analysis of smaller trials: how do their results compare? JAMA 1996;276:1332-8.
5. LeLorier J, Gregoire G, Benhaddad A, Lapierre J, Derderian F. Discrepancies between meta-analyses and subsequent large randomized, controlled trials. N Engl J Med 1997;337:536-42.
6. Villar J, Carroli G, Belizan JM. Predictive ability of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials. Lancet 1995;345:772-6.
7. Chalmers TC. Problems induced by meta-analyses. Stat Med 1991;10:971-9.
8. Barrowman N, Fang M, Sampson M, Moher D. Identifying null meta-analyses that are ripe for updating. BMC Med Res Methodol 2003;3:13.
9. Shojania KG, Sampson M, Ansari MT, Ji J, Doucette S, Moher D. How quickly do systematic reviews go out of date? A survival analysis. Ann Intern Med 2007;147:224-33.
10. Peto R. Why do we need systematic overviews of randomized trials? Stat Med 1987;6:233-44.
11. Yusuf S, Collins R, Peto R. Why do we need some large, simple randomized trials. Stat Med 1984;3:409-20.
12. Hennekens CH, Demets D. The need for large-scale randomized evidence without undue emphasis on small trials, meta-analyses, or subgroup analyses. JAMA 2009;302:2361-2.
13. Riley RD, Higgins JPT, Deeks JJ. Interpretation of random effects meta-analyses. BMJ 2011;342:d549.
14. Higgins JPT, Thompson SG, Spiegelhalter DJ. A re-evaluation of random-effects meta-analysis. J R Stat Soc Ser A Stat Soc 2009;172:137-59.
15. Woolcott JC, Richardson KJ, Wiens MO, Patel B, Marin J, Khan KM, et al. Meta-analysis of the impact of 9 medication classes on falls in elderly persons. Arch Intern Med 2009;169:1952-60.
16. DerSimonian R, Laird N. Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials 1986;7:177-88.
17. Warn DE, Thompson SG, Spiegelhalter DJ. Bayesian random effects meta-analysis of trials with binary outcomes: methods for the absolute risk difference and relative risk scales. Stat Med 2002;21: 1601-23.
18. Aitkin M, Francis B, Hinde J, Darnell R. Statistical modelling and inference. Statistical modelling in R. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 2009:28-96.
19. Rucker G, Schwarzer G, Carpenter J, Schumacher M. Undue reliance on I(2) in assessing heterogeneity may mislead. BMC Med Res Meth-odol 2008;8:79. doi:10.1186/1471-2288-8-79.
20. Spiegelhalter DJ, Abrams KR, Myles JP. Bayesian approaches to clinical trials and health-care evaluation. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd; 2004.
21. Lunn DJ, Thomas A, Best N, Spiegel halter D. Win BUGS da Bayes-ian modelling framework: concepts, structure, and extensibility. Stat Comput 2000;10:325-37.
22. Schwarzer G. meta: Meta-analysis with R. Available at http://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/meta/index.html2009. Accessed January 2009.
23. Ades AE, Lu G, Higgins JPT. The interpretation of random-effects meta-analysis in decision models. Med Decis Making 2005;25: 646-54.
24. Herbison P, Hay-Smith J, Gillespie WJ. Meta-analyses of small numbers of trials often agree with longer-term results. J Clin Epidemiol 2011;64:145-53.
25. Kelley GA, Kelley KS. Impact of progressive resistance training on lipids and lipoproteins in adults: another look at a meta-analysis using prediction intervals. Prev Med 2009;49:473-5.
26. Borenstein M, Hedges LV, Higgins JP, Rothstein HR. Introduction to meta-analysis. West Sussex, UK: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd; 2009.
27. Kendall MG. A theory of randomness. Biometrika 1941;32:1-15.
28. Poole C, Greenland S. Random-effects meta-analyses are not always conservative. Am J Epidemiol 1999;150:469-75.
29. Bohning D, Malzahn U, Dietz E, Schlattmann P, Viwatwongkasem C, Biggeri A. Some general points in estimating heterogeneity variance with the DerSimonian-Laird estimator. Biostat 2002;3:445-57.
30. Sutton AJ, Cooper NJ, Abrams KR, Lambert PC, Jones DR. A Bayes-ian approach to evaluating net clinical benefit allowed for parameter uncertainty. J Clin Epidemiol 2005;58:26-40.
31. Ioannidis JP, Cappelleri JC, Lau J. Issues in comparisons between meta-analyses and large trials. JAMA 1998;279:1089-93.
32. Furukawa TA, Streiner DL, Hori S. Discrepancies among megatrials. J Clin Epidemiol 2000;53:1193-9.
33. Glasziou P, Shepperd S, Brassey J. Can we rely on the best trial? A comparison of individual trials and systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol 2010;10:23.
34. Borm GF, Lemmers O, Fransen J, Donders R. The evidence provided by a single trial is less reliable than its statistical analysis suggests. J Clin Epidemiol 2009;62:711-5.
35. Guyatt GH, Mills EJ, Elbourne D. In the era of systematic reviews, does the size of an individual trial still matter? PLoS Med 2008;5:e4.
36. Shrier I, Platt RW, Steele RJ. Mega-trials vs. meta-analysis: precision vs. heterogeneity? Contemp Clin Trials 2007;28:324-8.
37. Jackson D, Bowden J, Baker R. How does the DerSimonian and Laird procedure for random effects meta-analysis compare with its more efficient but harder to compute counterparts? J Stat Plann Infer 2010;140:961-70.
38. Hamza TH, van Houwelingen HC, Stijnen T. The binomial distribution of meta-analysis was preferred to model within-study variability. J Clin Epidemiol 2008;61:41-51.
39. 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.