Comparative role of various methods of estimating between study variance for meta-analysis using random effect method

被引:7
|
作者
Pathak, Mona [1 ,2 ]
Dwivedi, Sada Nand [2 ]
Thakur, Bhaskar [1 ]
机构
[1] Kalinga Inst Med Sci, Div Biostat, Bhubaneswar 751024, India
[2] All India Inst Med Sci, Dept Biostat, New Delhi 110029, India
来源
关键词
DerSimonnian & Laird method; Coverage probability; Meta-analysis; Hazard ratio; Random effect method; HETEROGENEITY;
D O I
10.1016/j.cegh.2019.06.011
中图分类号
R1 [预防医学、卫生学];
学科分类号
1004 ; 120402 ;
摘要
Methods of synthesizing the effect size is guided by observed heterogeneity. As a convention, fixed effect method (FEM) is used for low/no heterogeneity. However, random effect method (REM) is used for substantial heterogeneity. But, synthesized (i.e., pooled) effect size under REM also relies on the method used to estimate between study variance along with within study variance. There are various methods to assess between study variance to be used under REM. Accordingly, present study compared existing methods of estimating between study variance on the basis of coverage probability and precision in order to find preferred method of assessing between study variance. Data from a systematic review and meta-analysis for various outcomes involving varying extent of sample size and heterogeneity was used. Hunter and Schmidt method and DerSimonnian & Laird method were found as preferred methods to estimate between study variance.
引用
收藏
页码:185 / 189
页数:5
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Methods for estimating between-study variance and overall effect in meta-analysis of odds ratios
    Bakbergenuly, Ilyas
    Hoaglin, David C.
    Kulinskaya, Elena
    [J]. RESEARCH SYNTHESIS METHODS, 2020, 11 (03) : 426 - 442
  • [2] Methods of estimating the pooled effect size under meta-analysis: A comparative appraisal
    Pathak, Mona
    Dwivedi, Sada Nand
    Thakur, Bhaskar
    Vishnubhatla, Sreenivas
    [J]. CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY AND GLOBAL HEALTH, 2020, 8 (01): : 105 - 112
  • [3] Methods to estimate the between-study variance and its uncertainty in meta-analysis
    Veroniki, Areti Angeliki
    Jackson, Dan
    Viechtbauer, Wolfgang
    Bender, Ralf
    Bowden, Jack
    Knapp, Guido
    Kuss, Oliver
    Higgins, Julian P. T.
    Langan, Dean
    Salanti, Georgia
    [J]. RESEARCH SYNTHESIS METHODS, 2016, 7 (01) : 55 - 79
  • [4] Avoiding zero between-study variance estimates in random-effects meta-analysis
    Chung, Yeojin
    Rabe-Hesketh, Sophia
    Choi, In-Hee
    [J]. STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2013, 32 (23) : 4071 - 4089
  • [5] Confidence intervals for the between-study variance in random effects meta-analysis using generalised Cochran heterogeneity statistics
    Jackson, Dan
    [J]. RESEARCH SYNTHESIS METHODS, 2013, 4 (03) : 220 - 229
  • [6] Estimating common mean and heterogeneity variance in two study case meta-analysis
    Rukhin, Andrew L.
    [J]. STATISTICS & PROBABILITY LETTERS, 2012, 82 (07) : 1318 - 1325
  • [7] Quantifying uncertainty in method of moments estimates of the heterogeneity variance in random effects meta-analysis
    Sidik, Kurex
    Jonkman, Jeffrey N.
    [J]. BIOMETRICAL JOURNAL, 2022, 64 (03) : 598 - 616
  • [8] A Method of Moments Estimator for Random Effect Multivariate Meta-Analysis
    Chen, Han
    Manning, Alisa K.
    Dupuis, Josee
    [J]. BIOMETRICS, 2012, 68 (04) : 1278 - 1284
  • [9] Methods for dealing with multiple outcomes in meta-analysis<bold>:</bold> a comparison between averaging effect sizes, robust variance estimation and multilevel meta-analysis
    Moeyaert, Mariola
    Ugille, Maaike
    Beretvas, S. Natasha
    Ferron, John
    Bunuan, Rommel
    Van den Noortgate, Wim
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SOCIAL RESEARCH METHODOLOGY, 2017, 20 (06) : 559 - 572
  • [10] Statistical methods for meta-analysis of microarray data: A comparative study
    Hu, PZ
    Greenwood, CMT
    Beyene, J
    [J]. INFORMATION SYSTEMS FRONTIERS, 2006, 8 (01) : 9 - 20