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.

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
慕青应助丧彪采纳,获得10
刚刚
2秒前
2秒前
搜集达人应助傲娇玉米采纳,获得10
2秒前
百里烬言发布了新的文献求助20
2秒前
xxy发布了新的文献求助10
4秒前
今后应助年糕.采纳,获得30
4秒前
林悦酥发布了新的文献求助10
5秒前
磊磊猪完成签到,获得积分10
5秒前
akui完成签到,获得积分10
5秒前
liiiiiii发布了新的文献求助30
5秒前
正直凌文完成签到,获得积分10
6秒前
天天快乐应助sl采纳,获得10
6秒前
耶耶完成签到,获得积分10
7秒前
aa发布了新的文献求助10
7秒前
7秒前
wmfang完成签到,获得积分10
8秒前
9秒前
情怀应助15966014069采纳,获得10
10秒前
明理以南完成签到,获得积分10
10秒前
落寞的惜萱完成签到,获得积分20
11秒前
陈静发布了新的文献求助10
11秒前
上善若水发布了新的文献求助10
11秒前
12秒前
13秒前
13秒前
14秒前
我想U静静发布了新的文献求助10
14秒前
专注凡梅完成签到,获得积分10
14秒前
yaxuandeng完成签到,获得积分20
15秒前
Linda完成签到,获得积分10
15秒前
samchen完成签到,获得积分10
15秒前
务实的胡萝卜完成签到 ,获得积分10
17秒前
17秒前
完美世界应助xxy采纳,获得30
18秒前
Ohh完成签到,获得积分10
18秒前
18秒前
sl发布了新的文献求助10
19秒前
19秒前
龙龙ff11_完成签到,获得积分10
19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
Encyclopedia of Agriculture and Food Systems Third Edition 2000
Clinical Microbiology Procedures Handbook, Multi-Volume, 5th Edition 临床微生物学程序手册,多卷,第5版 2000
人脑智能与人工智能 1000
King Tyrant 720
Silicon in Organic, Organometallic, and Polymer Chemistry 500
Principles of Plasma Discharges and Materials Processing, 3rd Edition 400
热门求助领域 (近24小时)
化学 材料科学 生物 医学 工程类 计算机科学 有机化学 物理 生物化学 纳米技术 复合材料 内科学 化学工程 人工智能 催化作用 遗传学 数学 基因 量子力学 物理化学
热门帖子
关注 科研通微信公众号,转发送积分 5601274
求助须知:如何正确求助?哪些是违规求助? 4686785
关于积分的说明 14846051
捐赠科研通 4680352
什么是DOI,文献DOI怎么找? 2539276
邀请新用户注册赠送积分活动 1506151
关于科研通互助平台的介绍 1471283