Choice of effect measure for meta-analyses of dichotomous outcomes influenced the identified heterogeneity and direction of small-study effects

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

Volumn 68, Issue 5, 2015, Pages 534-541

  Papageorgiou, Spyridon N ^a   Tsiranidou, Elli ^b   Antonoglou, Georgios N ^c   Deschner, James ^a   Jäger, Andreas ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BONN   (Germany)

^b ARISTOTLE UNIVERSITY OF THESSALONIKI   (Greece)

^c UNIVERSITY OF OULU   (Finland)

Author keywords

Dentistry; Effect measure; Meta analysis; Odds ratio; Risk difference; Risk ratio; Systematic reviews

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; ATTRIBUTABLE RISK; DATA BASE; EGGER TEST; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUBLISHING; RISK; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; COMPARATIVE STUDY; HUMAN; LITERATURE; META ANALYSIS (TOPIC); METHODOLOGY;

DATA INTERPRETATION, STATISTICAL; HUMANS; META-ANALYSIS AS TOPIC; ODDS RATIO; PUBLICATION BIAS; RESEARCH DESIGN; REVIEW LITERATURE AS TOPIC; RISK;

EID: 84928290952     PISSN: 08954356     EISSN: 18785921     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2015.01.004     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. N.E. Breslow, and N.E. Day Statistical methods in cancer research, volume I. The analysis of case-control studies 1980 International Agency for Research on Cancer Lyon
2. D.L. Sackett, J.J. Deeks, and D. Altman Down with odds ratios! Evid Based Med 1 1996 164 167
3. J. Deeks When can odds ratios mislead? Odds ratios should be used only in case-control studies and logistic regression analyses BMJ 317 1998 1155 1156
4. I. Olkin Odds ratios revisited Evid Based Med 3 1998 71
5. S. Senn Odds ratios revisited Evid Based Med 3 1998 71
6. D.G. Altman, J.J. Deeks, and D.L. Sackett Odds ratios should be avoided when events are common BMJ 317 1998 1318
7. R.J. Hayes Odds ratios and relative risks Lancet 2 1988 338
8. P. Cummings Studies should report estimates of treatment effects with confidence intervals Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 161 2007 518 519
9. R.J. Cook, and D.L. Sackett The number needed to treat: a clinically useful measure of treatment effect BMJ 310 1995 452 454
10. D.L. Sackett, W.S. Richardson, W.M. Rosenberg, and R.B. Haynes Evidence-based medicine: how to practice and teach EBM 1997 Churchill Livingstone New York
11. C.D. Mulrow, J.A. Cornell, C.R. Herrera, A. Kadri, L. Farnett, and C. Aguilar Hypertension in the elderly. Implications and generalizability of randomized trials JAMA 272 1994 1932 1938
12. H.T. Davies, I.K. Crombie, and M. Tavakoli When can odds ratios mislead? BMJ 316 1998 989 991
13. S.D. Walter Choice of effect measure for epidemiological data J Clin Epidemiol 53 2000 931 939
14. S.D. Walter Odds ratios revisited Evid Based Med 3 1998 71
15. A. Liberati, D.G. Altman, J. Tetzlaff, C. Mulrow, P.C. Gøtzsche, and J.P. Ioannidis The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration J Clin Epidemiol 62 2009 e1 e34
16. J.P.T. Higgins, and S. Green Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions, version 5.1.0 2011 John Wiley & Sons Chichester, UK
17. E.A. Engels, C.H. Schmid, N. Terrin, I. Olkin, and J. Lau Heterogeneity and statistical significance in meta-analysis: an empirical study of 125 meta-analyses Stat Med 19 2000 1707 1728
18. S.E. Brockwell, and I.R. Gordon A comparison of statistical methods for meta-analysis Stat Med 20 2001 825 840
19. E. Kontopantelis, and D. Reeves Performance of statistical methods for meta-analysis when true study effects are non-normally distributed: a simulation study Stat Methods Med Res 21 2012 409 426
20. E. Kontopantelis, D.A. Springate, and D. Reeves A re-analysis of the Cochrane Library data: the dangers of unobserved heterogeneity in meta-analyses PLoS One 8 2013 e69930
21. S.N. Papageorgiou, G. Antonoglou, E. Tsiranidou, S. Jepsen, and A. Jäger Bias and small-study effects influence treatment effect estimates: a meta-epidemiological study in oral medicine J Clin Epidemiol 67 2014 984 992
22. N. Mantel, and W. Haenszel Statistical aspects of the analysis of data from retrospective studies of disease J Natl Cancer Inst 22 1959 719 748
23. S. Greenland, and J.M. Robins Estimation of a common effect parameter from sparse follow-up data Biometrics 41 1985 55 68
24. S. Yusuf, R. Peto, J. Lewis, R. Collins, and P. Sleight Beta blockade during and after myocardial infarction: an overview of the randomised trials Prog Cardiovasc Dis 27 1985 335 371
25. W.G. Cochran The combination of estimates from different experiments Biometrics 10 1954 101 129
26. A. Whitehead, and J. Whitehead A general parametric approach to the meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials Stat Med 10 1991 1665 1677
27. R.J. Hardy, and S.G. Thompson Detecting and describing heterogeneity in meta-analysis Stat Med 17 1998 841 856
28. J.P. Higgins, and S.G. Thompson Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis Stat Med 21 2002 1539 1558
29. J.P. Higgins, S.G. Thompson, J.J. Deeks, and D.G. Altman Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses BMJ 327 2003 557 560
30. M. Egger, G. Davey Smith, M. Schneider, and C. Minder Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test BMJ 315 1997 629 634
31. J.A. Sterne, A.J. Sutton, J.P. Ioannidis, N. Terrin, D.R. Jones, and J. Lau Recommendations for examining and interpreting funnel plot asymmetry in meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials BMJ 343 2011 d4002
32. I.R. White, and D. Elbourne Assessing subgroup effects with binary data: can the use of different effect measures lead to different conclusions? BMC Med Res Methodol 5 2005 15
33. J.J. Deeks Issues in the selection of a summary statistic for meta-analysis of clinical trials with binary outcomes Stat Med 21 2002 1575 1600
34. T.A. Furukawa, G.H. Guyatt, and L.E. Griffith Can we individualize the 'number needed to treat'? an empirical study of summary effect measures in meta-analyses Int J Epidemiol 31 2002 72 76
35. J.A. Sterne, and M. Egger Funnel plots for detecting bias in meta-analysis: guidelines on choice of axis J Clin Epidemiol 54 2001 1046 1055
36. G. Schwarzer, G. Antes, and M. Schumacher Inflation of type I error rate in two statistical tests for the detection of publication bias in meta-analyses with binary outcomes Stat Med 21 2002 2465 2477
37. R.G. Newcombe A deficiency of the odds ratio as a measure of effect size Stat Med 25 2006 4235 4240
38. W.L. Holcomb Jr., T. Chaiworapongsa, D.A. Luke, and K.D. Burgdorf An odd measure of risk: use and misuse of the odds ratio Obstet Gynecol 98 2001 685 688
39. L.A. McNutt, C. Wu, X. Xue, and J.P. Hafner Estimating the relative risk in cohort studies and clinical trials of common outcomes Am J Epidemiol 157 2003 940 943
40. S. Greenland Model-based estimation of relative risks and other epidemiologic measures in studies of common outcomes and in case-control studies Am J Epidemiol 160 2004 301 305
41. D.J. Finney Comment J Chronic Dis 32 1979 78 79
42. J. Fleiss Statistical methods for rates and proportions 2nd ed. 1981 Wiley New York
43. A.R. Feinstein Indexes of contrast and quantitative significance for comparisons of two groups Stat Med 18 1999 2557 2581
44. J.C. Sinclair, and M.B. Bracken Clinically useful measures of effects in binary analyses of randomized trials J Clin Epidemiol 47 1994 881 889
45. D.A. Grimes, and K.F. Schulz Making sense of odds and odds ratios Obstet Gynecol 111 2008 423 426
46. M.J. Sweeting, A.J. Sutton, and P.C. Lambert What to add to nothing? Use and avoidance of continuity corrections in meta-analysis of sparse data Stat Med 23 2004 1351 1375
47. R.M. Harbord, M. Egger, and J.A. Sterne A modified test for small-study effects in meta-analyses of controlled trials with binary endpoints Stat Med 25 2006 3443 3457
48. J.L. Peters, A.J. Sutton, D.R. Jones, K.R. Abrams, and L. Rushton Comparison of two methods to detect publication bias in meta-analysis JAMA 295 2006 676 680
49. J.B. Copas, and J.Q. Shi A sensitivity analysis for publication bias in systematic reviews Stat Methods Med Res 10 2001 251 265
50. S.G. Moreno, A.J. Sutton, A.E. Ades, N.J. Cooper, and K.R. Abrams Adjusting for publication biases across similar interventions performed well when compared with gold standard data J Clin Epidemiol 64 2011 1230 1241
51. G. Rücker, G. Schwarzer, J.R. Carpenter, H. Binder, and M. Schumacher Treatment-effect estimates adjusted for small-study effects via a limit meta-analysis Biostatistics 12 2011 122 142
52. S.G. Moreno, A.J. Sutton, J.R. Thompson, A.E. Ades, K.R. Abrams, and N.J. Cooper A generalized weighting regression-derived meta-analysis estimator robust to small-study effects and heterogeneity Stat Med 31 2012 1407 1417
53. G. Schwarzer, J. Carpenter, and G. Rücker Empirical evaluation suggests Copas selection model preferable to trim-and-fill method for selection bias in meta-analysis J Clin Epidemiol 63 2010 282 288