Statistical heterogeneity in systematic reviews of clinical trials: a critical appraisal of guidelines and practice

系统回顾 荟萃分析 梅德林 元回归 样本量测定 批判性评价 出版偏见 虚假关系 研究异质性 协议(科学) 医学 管理科学 心理学 替代医学 计算机科学 统计 机器学习 病理 数学 政治学 法学 经济
作者
Julian P. T. Higgins,Simon Thompson,Jonathan J Deeks,Douglas G. Altman
出处
期刊:Journal of Health Services Research & Policy [SAGE Publishing]
卷期号:7 (1): 51-61 被引量:643
标识
DOI:10.1258/1355819021927674
摘要

Objective: Heterogeneity between study results can be a problem in any systematic review or meta-analysis of clinical trials. Identifying its presence, investigating its cause and correctly accounting for it in analyses all involve difficult decisions for the researcher. Our objectives were: to collate recommendations on the subject of dealing with heterogeneity in systematic reviews of clinical trials; to investigate current practice in addressing heterogeneity in Cochrane reviews; and to compare current practice with recommendations. Methods: We review guidelines for those undertaking systematic reviews and examine how heterogeneity is addressed in practice in a sample of systematic reviews, and their protocols, from the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Results: Advice to reviewers is on the whole consistent and sensible. However, examination of a sample of Cochrane protocols and reviews demonstrates that the advice is difficult to follow given the small numbers of studies identified in many systematic reviews, the difficulty of pre-specifying important effect modifiers for subgroup analysis or meta-regression and the unresolved debate concerning fixed versus random effects metaanalyses. There was disagreement between protocols and reviews, often either regarding choice of important potential effect modifiers or due to the review identifying too few studies to perform planned analyses. Conclusion: Guidelines that address practical issues are required to reduce the risk of spurious findings from investigations of heterogeneity. This may involve discouraging statistical investigations such as subgroup analyses and meta-regression, rather than simply adopting a cautious approach to their interpretation, unless a large number of studies is available. The notion of a priori specification of potential effect modifiers for a retrospective review of studies is ill-defined, and the appropriateness of using a statistical test for heterogeneity to decide between analysis strategies is suspect.

科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI
科研通是完全免费的文献互助平台,具备全网最快的应助速度,最高的求助完成率。 对每一个文献求助,科研通都将尽心尽力,给求助人一个满意的交代。
实时播报
刚刚
咸鱼饭团完成签到,获得积分10
刚刚
开心的眼睛完成签到,获得积分0
2秒前
斯文败类应助眠羊采纳,获得10
2秒前
3秒前
3秒前
4秒前
靓丽寄文发布了新的文献求助10
4秒前
qi完成签到,获得积分10
5秒前
cdc完成签到 ,获得积分10
6秒前
6秒前
7秒前
pancake发布了新的文献求助10
9秒前
Violet发布了新的文献求助10
9秒前
CodeCraft应助huahero2025采纳,获得10
11秒前
linxixi完成签到,获得积分10
12秒前
13秒前
小胡同学发布了新的文献求助10
13秒前
化学天空完成签到,获得积分10
14秒前
17秒前
17秒前
21秒前
22秒前
现代尔芙完成签到 ,获得积分10
22秒前
大模型应助ant采纳,获得10
22秒前
heady完成签到,获得积分10
24秒前
26秒前
羊羊羊发布了新的文献求助20
28秒前
29秒前
段盈完成签到,获得积分10
29秒前
翰墨馨完成签到,获得积分10
30秒前
程程程发布了新的文献求助20
32秒前
djbj2022发布了新的文献求助10
32秒前
小泽完成签到,获得积分10
33秒前
眠羊发布了新的文献求助10
33秒前
脑洞疼应助suke采纳,获得10
33秒前
一团小煤球完成签到,获得积分10
34秒前
35秒前
zxdw完成签到,获得积分10
35秒前
贤惠的又菡完成签到 ,获得积分10
37秒前
高分求助中
(应助此贴封号)【重要!!请各用户(尤其是新用户)详细阅读】【科研通的精品贴汇总】 10000
Developing Genetic Editing Tools for Lysobacter 2000
Моделирование процессов самоорганизации в кристаллообразующих системах 1000
History of U.S. Space Surveillance and Satellite Cataloging 1000
Adhesion Science: Principles & Practice 800
Signals, Systems, and Signal Processing 610
Fundamentals of Pharmaceutical and Biologics Regulations: A Global Perspective, Second Edition 600
热门求助领域 (近24小时)
化学 材料科学 医学 生物 纳米技术 工程类 有机化学 化学工程 生物化学 计算机科学 物理 内科学 复合材料 催化作用 物理化学 光电子学 电极 细胞生物学 基因 无机化学
热门帖子
关注 科研通微信公众号,转发送积分 6524849
求助须知:如何正确求助?哪些是违规求助? 8318181
关于积分的说明 17801107
捐赠科研通 5626656
什么是DOI,文献DOI怎么找? 2928927
邀请新用户注册赠送积分活动 1905563
关于科研通互助平台的介绍 1765458