Heterogeneity in meta-analysis of FDG-PET studies to diagnose lung cancer

JAMA - Journal of the American Medical Association

Volumn 313, Issue 4, 2015, Pages 419-

  Mills, Edward J ^a   Jansen, Jeroen P ^b   Kanters, Steve ^c  

^a STANFORD UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b TUFTS UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F 18;

ARTIFACT; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER STATISTICS; HUMAN; LETTER; LUNG CANCER; META ANALYSIS (TOPIC); POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; SAMPLE SIZE; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; VARIANCE; DIAGNOSTIC USE; LUNG TUMOR; SCINTISCANNING;

FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F18; HUMANS; LUNG NEOPLASMS; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY;

EID: 84921772271     PISSN: 00987484     EISSN: 15383598     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1001/jama.2014.16482     Document Type: Letter

References (3)

1. Deppen SA, Blume JD, Kensinger CD, et al. Accuracy of FDG-PET to diagnose lung cancer in areas with infectious lung disease: ameta-analysis. JAMA. 2014; 312(12):1227-1236.
2. Higgins JP, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, Altman DG. Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ. 2003;327(7414):557-560.
3. Rücker G, Schwarzer G, Carpenter JR, Schumacher M. Undue reliance on I(2) in assessing heterogeneity maymislead. BMC Med ResMethodol. 2008;8:79.