Meta-analysis of randomised trials with a continuous outcome according to baseline imbalance and availability of individual participant data

Statistics in Medicine

Volumn 32, Issue 16, 2013, Pages 2747-2766

  Riley, Richard D ^a   Kauser, Iram ^a   Bland, Martin ^b   Thijs, Lutgarde ^c   Staessen, Jan A ^c,d   Wang, Jiguang ^e   Gueyffier, Francois ^f   Deeks, Jonathan J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BIRMINGHAM   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF YORK   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY OF LEUVEN   (Belgium)

^d MAASTRICHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^e SHANGHAI JIAO TONG UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (China)

^f UNIVERSITÉ LYON 1   (France)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANALYSIS OF COVARIANCE; ARTICLE; BLOOD PRESSURE; CONTINUOUS OUTCOME; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; DATA PROCESSING; FOLLOW UP; META ANALYSIS (TOPIC); RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); REGRESSION ANALYSIS; SCORING SYSTEM; STATISTICAL MODEL; TREATMENT OUTCOME; TREATMENT RESPONSE; TROWMANS METHOD;

ANTIHYPERTENSIVE AGENTS; BLOOD PRESSURE; BODY WEIGHT; CALCIUM; DATA INTERPRETATION, STATISTICAL; HUMANS; HYPERTENSION; META-ANALYSIS AS TOPIC; MODELS, STATISTICAL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC;

EID: 84879169822     PISSN: 02776715     EISSN: 10970258     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/sim.5726     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. Stewart LA, Parmar MK. Meta-analysis of the literature or of individual patient data: is there a difference? Lancet 1993; 341:418-422.
2. Stewart LA, Tierney JF. To IPD or not to IPD? Advantages and disadvantages of systematic reviews using individual patient data. Evaluation & the Health Profession 2002; 25:76-97.
3. Riley RD, Lambert PC, Abo-Zaid G. Meta-analysis of individual participant data: conduct, rationale and reporting. British Medical Journal 2010; 340:c221.
4. Riley RD. Commentary: like it and lump it? Meta-analysis using individual participant data. International Journal of Epidemiology 2010; 39:1359-1361.
5. Stewart L, Tierney J, Burdett S. Chapter 14. Do systematic reviews based on individual patient data offer a means of circumventing biases associated with trial publications? In Do Systematic Reviews Based on Individual Patient Data Offer a Means of Circumventing Biases Associated with Trial Publications? Rothstein HR, Sutton AJ, Borenstein M (eds). John Wiley & Sons, Ltd: Chichester, UK, 2006; 261-286.
6. Vickers AJ, Altman DG. Statistics notes: analysing controlled trials with baseline and follow up measurements. British Medical Journal 2001; 323:1123-1124.
7. Deeks JJ, Higgins JP, Altman DG. Chapter 9. Analysing data and undertaking meta-analyses. In Analysing Data and Undertaking Meta-analyses, Higgins JP, Green S (eds). John Wiley & Sons, Ltd: Chichester, UK, 2008.
8. Aiello F, Attanasio M, Tinè F. Assessing covariate imbalance in meta-analysis studies. Statistics in Medicine 2011; 30(22):2671-2682.
9. Trowman R, Dumville JC, Torgerson DJ, Cranny G. The impact of trial baseline imbalances should be considered in systematic reviews: a methodological case study. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2007; 60:1229-1233.
10. Rogers G, Elston J, Garside R, Roome C, Taylor R, Younger P, Zawada A, Somerville M. The harmful health effects of recreational ecstasy: a systematic review of observational evidence. Health Technology Assessment 2009; 13:1-338.
11. Hall JC. How to dissect surgical journals: XV-review articles. ANZ Journal of Surgery 2011; 81:831-834.
12. Higgins JP, Whitehead A, Turner RM, Omar RZ, Thompson SG. Meta-analysis of continuous outcome data from individual patients. Statistics in Medicine 2001; 20:2219-2241.
13. Riley RD, Lambert PC, Staessen JA, Wang J, Gueyffier F, Thijs L, Boutitie F. Meta-analysis of continuous outcomes combining individual patient data and aggregate data. Statistics in Medicine 2008; 27:1870-1893.
14. Wang JG, Staessen JA, Franklin SS, Fagard R, Gueyffier F. Systolic and diastolic blood pressure lowering as determinants of cardiovascular outcome. Hypertension 2005; 45:907-913.
15. Gueyffier F, Boutitie F, Boissel JP, Coope J, Cutler J, Ekbom T, Fagard R, Friedman L, Perry HM, Pocock S, et al. INDANA: a meta-analysis on individual patient data in hypertension. Protocol and preliminary results. Therapie 1995; 50:353-362.
16. Liu L, Wang JG, Gong L, Liu G, Staessen JA. Comparison of active treatment and placebo in older Chinese patients with isolated systolic hypertension. Systolic Hypertension in China (Syst-China) Collaborative Group. Journal of Hypertension 1998; 16:1823-1829.
17. Staessen JA, Fagard R, Thijs L, Celis H, Arabidze GG, Birkenhager WH, Bulpitt CJ, de Leeuw PW, Dollery CT, Fletcher AE, Forette F, Leonetti G, Nachev C, O'Brien ET, Rosenfeld J, Rodicio JL, Tuomilehto J, Zanchetti A. Randomised double-blind comparison of placebo and active treatment for older patients with isolated systolic hypertension. The Systolic Hypertension in Europe (Syst-Eur) Trial Investigators. Lancet 1997; 350:757-764.
18. Amery A, Birkenhager W, Brixko P, Bulpitt C, Clement D, Deruyttere M, DeSchaepdryver A, Dollery C, Fagard R, Forette F et al. Mortality and morbidity results from the European Working Party on High Blood Pressure in the Elderly trial. Lancet 1985; 1:1349-1354.
19. Trowman R, Dumville JC, Hahn S, Torgerson DJ. A systematic review of the effects of calcium supplementation on body weight. British Journal of Nutrition 2006; 95:1033-1038.
20. Simmonds MC, Higgins JPT, Stewart LA, Tierney JF, Clarke MJ, Thompson SG. Meta-analysis of individual patient data from randomized trials: a review of methods used in practice. Clinical Trials 2005; 2:209-217.
21. Simmonds MC. Statistical methodology of individual patient data. PhD Thesis, University of Cambridge, 2005.
22. Olkin I, Sampson A. Comparison of meta-analysis versus analysis of variance of individual patient data. Biometrics 1998; 54:317-322.
23. Mathew T, Nordstrom K. On the equivalence of meta-analysis using literature and using individual patient data. Biometrics 1999; 55:1221-1223.
24. Senn S. Change from baseline and analysis of covariance revisited. Statistics in Medicine 2006; 30:4334-4344.
25. Frison LJ, Pocock SJ. Linearly divergent treatment effects in clinical trials with repeated measures: efficient analysis using summary statistics. Statistics in Medicine 1997; 16:2855-2872.
26. VanBreukelen GJ. ANCOVA versus change from baseline: more power in randomized studies, more bias in nonrandomized studies. Journal of Clinical Epidemiol 2006; 59:920-925.
27. Liang KY, Zeger SL. Longitudinal data analysis of continuous and discrete responses for pre-post designs. Sankhya-The Indian Journal of Statistics Series B 2000; 62:134-148.
28. Samuels ML. Use of analysis of covariance in clinical trials: a clarification. Controlled Clinical Trials 1986; 7:325-329.
29. Whitehead A. Meta-analysis of Controlled Clinical Trials. Wiley: West Sussex, 2002.
30. DerSimonian R, Laird N. Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Controlled Clinical Trials 1986; 7:177-188.
31. Brumback BA, Winner LH, Casella G, Ghosh M, Hall A, Zhang J, Chorba L, Duncan P. Estimating a weighted average of stratum-specific parameters. Statistics in Medicine 2008; 7:4972-4991.
32. Higgins JP, Thompson SG, Spiegelhalter DJ. A re-evaluation of random-effects meta-analysis. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A 2009; 172:137-159.
33. Riley RD, Higgins JP, Deeks JJ. Interpretation of random effects meta-analyses. British Medical Journal 2011; 342:d549.
34. Abrams KR, Gillies CL, Lambert PC. Meta-analysis of heterogeneously reported trials assessing change from baseline. Statistics in Medicine 2005; 24:3823-3844.
35. Trusheim MR, Berndt ER, Douglas FL. Stratified medicine: strategic and economic implications of combining drugs and clinical biomarkers. Nature Reviews Drug Discovery 2007:287-293.
36. Simmonds MC, Higgins JP. Covariate heterogeneity in meta-analysis: criteria for deciding between meta-regression and individual patient data. Statistics in Medicine 2007; 26:2982-2999.
37. Thompson SG, Kaptoge S, White I, Wood A, Perry P, Danesh J. Statistical methods for the time-to-event analysis of individual participant data from multiple epidemiological studies. International Journal of Epidemiology 2010; 39:1345-1359.
38. Berlin JA, Santanna J, Schmid CH, Szczech LA, Feldman HI. Individual patient- versus group-level data meta-regressions for the investigation of treatment effect modifiers: ecological bias rears its ugly head. Statistics in Medicine 2002; 21:371-387.
39. Lambert PC, Sutton AJ, Abrams KR, Jones DR. A comparison of summary patient-level covariates in meta-regression with individual patient data meta-analysis. Journal of Clinical Epidemiol 2002; 55:86-94.
40. Schmid CH, Stark PC, Berlin JA, Landais P, Lau J. Meta-regression detected associations between heterogeneous treatment effects and study-level, but not patient-level, factors. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2004; 57:683-697.
41. Senn S. Testing for basline balance in clinical trials. Statistics in Medicine 1994; 13:1715-1726.
42. Riley RD, Simmonds MC, Look MP. Evidence synthesis combining individual patient data and aggregate data: a systematic review identified current practice and possible methods. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2007; 60:431-439.
43. Ahmed I, Sutton AJ, Riley RD. Assessment of publication bias, selection bias, and unavailable data in meta-analyses using individual participant data: a database survey. British Medical Journal 2012; 344:d7762.