A generalized weighting regression-derived meta-analysis estimator robust to small-study effects and heterogeneity

Statistics in Medicine

Volumn 31, Issue 14, 2012, Pages 1407-1417

  Moreno, Santiago G ^a   Sutton, Alex J ^a   Thompson, John R ^b   Ades, A E ^c   Abrams, Keith R ^b   Cooper, Nicola J ^b  

^a Fundació Clínic per a la Recerca Biomédica ^*  (Spain)

^b UNIVERSITY OF LEICESTER   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY OF BRISTOL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Heterogeneity; Meta analysis; Meta regression; Publication bias; Small study effects

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CASE STUDY; HETEROGENEITY; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MATHEMATICAL COMPUTING; META ANALYSIS (TOPIC); METHODOLOGY; PUBLICATION; RANDOMIZATION; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; RELIABILITY; SMALL STUDY EFFECT; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; STATISTICAL PARAMETERS;

CALCIUM; COMPUTER SIMULATION; DIETARY SUPPLEMENTS; EATING DISORDERS; FEMALE; HUMANS; META-ANALYSIS AS TOPIC; MODELS, STATISTICAL; PRE-ECLAMPSIA; PREGNANCY; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; SAMPLE SIZE;

EID: 84863414972     PISSN: 02776715     EISSN: 10970258     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/sim.4488     Document Type: Article

References (56)

1. Harbour R, Miller J. A new system for grading recommendations in evidence based guidelines. British Medical Journal 2001 323: 334-336. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.323.7308.334.
2. LeLorier J, Gregoire G, Benhaddad A, Lapierre J, Derderian F. Discrepancies between meta-analyses and subsequent large randomized, controlled trials. The New England Journal of Medicine 1997 337: 536-542, DOI: 10.1056/nejm199708213370806.
3. Turner RM, Spiegelhalter DJ, Smith GCS, Thompson SG. Bias modelling in evidence synthesis.Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A (Statistics in Society) 2009 172: 21-47.
4. Welton NJ, Ades AE, Carlin JB, Altman DG, Sterne JAC. Models for potentially biased evidence in meta-analysis using empirically based priors. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A (Statistics in Society) 2009 172.
5. Kirkham JJ, Dwan KM, Altman DG, Gamble C, Dodd S, Smyth R, Williamson PR. The impact of outcome reporting bias in randomised controlled trials on a cohort of systematic reviews. British Medical Journal 2010 340: c365, DOI: 10.1136/bmj.c365.
6. Sterne JAC, Gavaghan D, Egger M. Publication related bias in meta-analysis: Power of statistical tests and prevalence in the literature. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2000 53: 1119-1129.
7. Sackett DL, Oxman AD. HARLOT plc: An amalgamation of the world's two oldest professions. British Medical Journal 2003 327: 1442-1445.
8. Moreno SG, Sutton AJ, Turner EH, Abrams KR, Cooper NJ, Palmer TM, Ades AE. Novel methods to deal with publication biases: secondary analysis of antidepressant trials in the FDA trial registry database and related journal publications. British Medical Journal 2009 339: b2981, DOI: 10.1136/bmj.b2981.
9. Nüesch E, Trelle S, Reichenbach S, Rutjes AWS, Tschannen B, Altman DG, Egger M, Jüni P. Small study effects in meta-analyses of osteoarthritis trials: meta-epidemiological study. British Medical Journal 2010 341: c3515. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.c3515.
10. Turner EH, Matthews AM, Linardatos E, Tell RA, Rosenthal R. Selective publication of antidepressant trials and its influence on apparent efficacy. New England Journal of Medicine 2008 358: 252-260.
11. Dwan K, Altman DG, Arnaiz JA, Bloom J, Chan A, Cronin E, Decullier E, Easterbrook PJ, Von Elm E, Gamble C. Systematic review of the empirical evidence of study publication bias and outcome reporting bias. PLoS ONE 2008 3: e3081.
12. Sterne JAC, Egger M, Moher D.2008. Chapter 10: Addressing reporting biases. In Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Intervention. Version 5.0.0 (updated September 2009) (available from www.cochrane-handbook.org), Higgins JPT, Green S (eds). Cochrane Collaboration, Oxford.
13. Chan A-W. Bias, spin, and misreporting: Time for full access to trial protocols and results. PLoS Medicine 2008 5: e230.
14. Lee K, Bacchetti P, Sim I. Publication of clinical trials supporting successful new drug applications: A literature analysis. PLoS Medicine 2008 5: e191.
15. Rising K, Bacchetti P, Bero L. Reporting bias in drug trials submitted to the Food and Drug Administration: Review of publication and presentation. PLoS Medicine 2008 5: e217.
16. Melander H, Ahlqvist-Rastad J, Meijer G, Beermann B. Evidence b(i)ased medicine-selective reporting from studies sponsored by pharmaceutical industry: review of studies in new drug applications. BMJ 2003 326: 1171-1173. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.326.7400.1171.
17. Rücker G, Schwarzer G, Carpenter JR, Binder H, Schumacher M. Treatment-effect estimates adjusted for small-study effects via a limit meta-analysis. Biostat 2010: kxq046. DOI: 10.1093/biostatistics/kxq046.
18. Moreno SG, Sutton AJ, Ades AE, Stanley TD, Abrams KR, Peters JL, Cooper NJ. Assessment of regression-based methods to adjust for publication bias through a comprehensive simulation study. BMC Medical Research Methodology 2009 9: 2.
19. Moreno SG, Sutton AJ, Ades AE, Cooper NJ, Abrams KR. Adjusting for publication biases across similar interventions performed well when compared with gold standard data. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2011 64: 1230-1241. DOI: S0895-4356(11)00051-5. [pii] 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2011.01.009.
20. Hemingway H, Philipson P, Chen R, Fitzpatrick NK, Damant J, Shipley M, Abrams KR, Moreno SG, McAllister KS, Palmer S, Kaski JC, Timmis AD, Hingorani AD. Evaluating the quality of research into a single prognostic biomarker: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 83 studies of C-Reactive protein in stable coronary artery disease. PLoS Med 2010 7: e1000286. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000286.
21. Anothaisintawee T, Attia J, Nickel JC, Thammakraisorn S, Numthavaj P, McEvoy M, Thakkinstian A. Management of chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. JAMA 2011 305: 78-86. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2010.1913.
22. Davies EJ, Moxham T, Rees K, Singh S, Coats AJ, Ebrahim S, Lough F, Taylor RS. Exercise training for systolic heart failure: Cochrane systematic review and meta-analysis. European Journal of Heart Failure 2010 12: 706-715. DOI: 10.1093/eurjhf/hfq056.
23. Greenland S, O'Rourke K. On the bias produced by quality scores in meta-analysis, and a hierarchical view of proposed solutions. Biostat 2001 2: 463-471, DOI: 10.1093/biostatistics/2.4.463.
24. Rucker G, Carpenter JR, Schwarzer G. Detecting and adjusting for small-study effects in meta-analysis. Biometrical Journal 2011 53: 351-368. DOI: 10.1002/bimj.201000151.
25. Nüesch E, Jüni P. Commentary: Which meta-analyses are conclusive?International Journal of Epidemiology 2009 38: 298-303. DOI: 10.1093/ije/dyn265.
26. Shang A, Huwiler-Müntener K, Nartey L, Jüni P, Dörig S, Sterne JAC, Pewsner D, Egger M. Are the clinical effects of homoeopathy placebo effects? Comparative study of placebo-controlled trials of homoeopathy and allopathy. Lancet 2005 366: 726-732.
27. Ioannidis JPA, Trikalinos TA. The appropriateness of asymmetry tests for publication bias in meta-analyses: a large survey. Canadian Medical Association Journal 2007 176: 1091-1096. DOI: 10.1503/cmaj.060410.
28. McMahon B, Holly L, Harrington R, Roberts C, Green J. Do larger studies find smaller effects? The example of studies for the prevention of conduct disorder. European child & adolescent psychiatry 2008 17: 432-437. DOI: 10.1007/s00787-008-0685-9.
29. Nartey L, Huwiler-Müntener K, Shang A, Liewald K, Jüni P, Egger M. Matched-pair study showed higher quality of placebo-controlled trials in Western phytotherapy than conventional medicine. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2007 60: 787-787.
30. Shang A, Huwiler K, Nartey L, Jüni P, Egger M. Placebo-controlled trials of Chinese herbal medicine and conventional medicine comparative study. Int J Epidemiol 2007 36: 1086-1092. DOI: 10.1093/ije/dym119.
31. Peters J, Sutton AJ, Jones DR, Abrams KR, Rushton L. Contour-enhanced meta-analysis funnel plots help distinguish publication bias from other causes of asymmetry. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2008:991-996.
32. Duval S, Tweedie RL. Trim and fill: A simple funnel plot based method of testing and adjusting for publication bias in meta-analysis. Biometrics 2000 56: 455-463.
33. Thompson SG, Sharp SJ. Explaining heterogeneity in meta-analysis: a comparison of methods. Statistics in Medicine 1999 18: 2693-2708.
34. Egger M, Smith GD, Schneider M, Minder C.Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. BMJ 1997 315: 629-634.
35. Harbord RM, Higgins JPT. Meta-regression in Stata. Stata Journal 2008 8: 493-519.
36. Harbord RM, Egger M, Sterne JAC. A modified test for small-study effects in meta-analyses of controlled trials with binary endpoints. Statistics in Medicine 2006 25: 3443-3457.
37. Berkey CS, Hoaglin DC, Antczak-Bouckoms A, Mosteller F, Colditz GA. meta-analysis of multiple outcomes by regression with random effects. Statistics in Medicine 1998 17: 2537-2550.
38. Thompson SG, Higgins JPT. How should meta-regression analyses be undertaken and interpreted?Statistics in Medicine 2002 21: 1559-1573.
39. Higgins JPT, Thompson SG, Spiegelhalter DJ. A re-evaluation of random-effects meta-analysis. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A (Statistics in Society) 2009 172.
40. Sutton AJ, Abrams KR, Jones DR, Sheldon TA, Song F.Methods for meta-analysis in medical research, John Wiley: London, 2000.
41. DerSimonian R, Kacker R. Random-effects model for meta-analysis of clinical trials: An update. Contemporary Clinical Trials 2007 28: 105-114.
42. Viechtbauer W. Hypothesis tests for population heterogeneity in meta-analysis. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology 2007 60: 29-60.
43. Viechtbauer W. Confidence intervals for the amount of heterogeneity in meta-analysis. Statistics in Medicine 2007 26: 37-52.
44. Gelman A, Hill J. Data analysis using regression and multilevel/hierarchical models, Cambridge university press: New York, 2007.
45. Moodley J.Commentary: Calcium supplementation during pregnancy for preventing hypertensive disorders and related problems. International Journal of Epidemiology 2007 36: 293.
46. Hofmeyr GJ, Lawrie TA, Atallah AN, Duley L. Calcium supplementation during pregnancy for preventing hypertensive disorders and related problems. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2010, DOI: 10.1002/14651858. CD001059.pub3.
47. Palmer TM, Peters JL, Sutton AJ, Moreno SG. Contour-enhanced funnel plots for meta-analysis. Stata Journal 2008 8: 242-254.
48. Hofmeyr GJ, Atallah A, Duley L. Dietary calcium supplementation and pre-eclampsia. Commentary. International Journal of Epidemiology 2007 36: 290-293.
49. Xu H, Platt RW, Luo Z-C, Wei S, Fraser WD. Exploring heterogeneity in meta-analyses: needs, resources and challenges. Paediatric and Perinatal Epidemiology 2008 22: 18-28.
50. Poole C, Greenland S. Random-effects meta-analysis are not always conservative. American Journal of Epidemiology 1999 150: 469-475.
51. Villar J, Mackey ME, Carroli G, Donner A. Meta-analyses in systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials in perinatal medicine: comparison of fixed and random effects models. Statistics in Medicine 2001 20: 3635-3647.
52. Rubin DB. meta-analysis: literature synthesis or effect-size surface estimation? Journal of Educational Statistics 1992 17: 363-374.
53. Guyatt G, Devereaux PJ, Pogue J, Yusuf S, Yang H, Montori V, Alonso-Coello P, Urrutia G, Berwanger O, Ciapponi A, Salazar A, Trsitan M. Fixed and random effect models when one trial dominates meta-analysis results. German Journal for Quality in Health Care 2008 102: 98-99.
54. Higgins JPT, Spiegelhalter DJ. Being sceptical about meta-analyses: a Bayesian perspective on magnesium trials in myocardial infarction. International Journal of Epidemiology 2002 31: 96-104. DOI: 10.1093/ije/31.1.96.
55. Schmid CH, Lau J, McIntosh MW, Cappelleri JC. An empirical study of the effect of the control rate as a predictor of treatment efficacy in meta-analysis of clinical trials. Statistics in Medicine 1998 17: 1923-1942.
56. Sterne JAC, Egger M, Davey Smith G. Systematic reviews in health care: Investigating and dealing with publication and other biases in meta-analysis. BMJ 2001 323: 101-105.