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 经济 数学 法学 政治学
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]
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.
最长约 10秒,即可获得该文献文件

科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI
更新
PDF的下载单位、IP信息已删除 (2025-6-4)

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
zoe666完成签到,获得积分10
刚刚
刚刚
hhh发布了新的文献求助10
刚刚
yile完成签到,获得积分10
刚刚
1秒前
11发布了新的文献求助30
1秒前
WC发布了新的文献求助10
1秒前
2秒前
2秒前
2秒前
搞怪哑铃完成签到,获得积分10
2秒前
Li完成签到,获得积分10
2秒前
Olivia完成签到,获得积分10
2秒前
2秒前
2秒前
3秒前
斯文一笑发布了新的文献求助10
4秒前
4秒前
MUAL完成签到,获得积分10
5秒前
所所应助RRR采纳,获得10
5秒前
流云发布了新的文献求助20
5秒前
ye完成签到,获得积分10
5秒前
悲凉的小馒头完成签到,获得积分10
5秒前
正直半雪完成签到,获得积分10
5秒前
5秒前
鼠鼠发布了新的文献求助10
7秒前
复杂从梦发布了新的文献求助10
7秒前
xiaomaxia发布了新的文献求助10
8秒前
张发财应助zhendemengshi采纳,获得10
8秒前
WC完成签到,获得积分10
8秒前
Xiaoxiao应助xiaoai采纳,获得10
8秒前
顾矜应助思维隋采纳,获得10
9秒前
务实晓蓝完成签到,获得积分10
9秒前
涂博强发布了新的文献求助30
9秒前
9秒前
hakei完成签到,获得积分10
10秒前
兴奋的听筠关注了科研通微信公众号
10秒前
10秒前
orchid发布了新的文献求助10
10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
Pipeline and riser loss of containment 2001 - 2020 (PARLOC 2020) 1000
A Half Century of the Sonogashira Reaction 1000
Artificial Intelligence driven Materials Design 600
The Social Work Ethics Casebook: Cases and Commentary (revised 2nd ed.).. Frederic G. Reamer 600
Phylogenetic study of the order Polydesmida (Myriapoda: Diplopoda) 500
A Manual for the Identification of Plant Seeds and Fruits : Second revised edition 500
热门求助领域 (近24小时)
化学 医学 生物 材料科学 工程类 有机化学 内科学 生物化学 物理 计算机科学 纳米技术 遗传学 基因 复合材料 化学工程 物理化学 病理 催化作用 免疫学 量子力学
热门帖子
关注 科研通微信公众号,转发送积分 5183473
求助须知:如何正确求助?哪些是违规求助? 4369781
关于积分的说明 13607386
捐赠科研通 4221555
什么是DOI,文献DOI怎么找? 2315256
邀请新用户注册赠送积分活动 1313969
关于科研通互助平台的介绍 1262801