Confidence intervals for the between-study variance in random-effects meta-analysis using generalised heterogeneity statistics: should we use unequal tails?

被引:20
|
作者
Jackson, Dan [1 ]
Bowden, Jack [1 ]
机构
[1] MRC, Biostat Unit, Cambridge, England
来源
关键词
Confidence interval width; Quadratic forms; Statistical conventions; RANDOM-EFFECTS MODEL; PREDICTIVE-DISTRIBUTIONS; CLINICAL-TRIALS; REEVALUATION; STANDARD;
D O I
10.1186/s12874-016-0219-y
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: Confidence intervals for the between study variance are useful in random-effects meta-analyses because they quantify the uncertainty in the corresponding point estimates. Methods for calculating these confidence intervals have been developed that are based on inverting hypothesis tests using generalised heterogeneity statistics. Whilst, under the random effects model, these new methods furnish confidence intervals with the correct coverage, the resulting intervals are usually very wide, making them uninformative. Methods: We discuss a simple strategy for obtaining 95 % confidence intervals for the between-study variance with a markedly reduced width, whilst retaining the nominal coverage probability. Specifically, we consider the possibility of using methods based on generalised heterogeneity statistics with unequal tail probabilities, where the tail probability used to compute the upper bound is greater than 2.5 %. This idea is assessed using four real examples and a variety of simulation studies. Supporting analytical results are also obtained. Results: Our results provide evidence that using unequal tail probabilities can result in shorter 95 % confidence intervals for the between-study variance. We also show some further results for a real example that illustrates how shorter confidence intervals for the between-study variance can be useful when performing sensitivity analyses for the average effect, which is usually the parameter of primary interest. Conclusions: We conclude that using unequal tail probabilities when computing 95 % confidence intervals for the between-study variance, when using methods based on generalised heterogeneity statistics, can result in shorter confidence intervals. We suggest that those who find the case for using unequal tail probabilities convincing should use the '1-4 % split', where greater tail probability is allocated to the upper confidence bound. The 'width-optimal' interval that we present deserves further investigation.
引用
收藏
页数:15
相关论文
共 23 条
  • [1] Confidence intervals for the between-study variance in random-effects meta-analysis using generalised heterogeneity statistics: should we use unequal tails?
    Dan Jackson
    Jack Bowden
    BMC Medical Research Methodology, 16
  • [2] Confidence intervals for the between-study variance in random effects meta-analysis using generalised Cochran heterogeneity statistics
    Jackson, Dan
    RESEARCH SYNTHESIS METHODS, 2013, 4 (03) : 220 - 229
  • [3] Avoiding zero between-study variance estimates in random-effects meta-analysis
    Chung, Yeojin
    Rabe-Hesketh, Sophia
    Choi, In-Hee
    STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2013, 32 (23) : 4071 - 4089
  • [4] Approximate confidence intervals for moment-based estimators of the between-study variance in random effects meta-analysis
    Jackson, Dan
    Bowden, Jack
    Baker, Rose
    RESEARCH SYNTHESIS METHODS, 2015, 6 (04) : 372 - 382
  • [5] Summarizing empirical information on between-study heterogeneity for Bayesian random-effects meta-analysis
    Roever, Christian
    Sturtz, Sibylle
    Lilienthal, Jona
    Bender, Ralf
    Friede, Tim
    STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2023, 42 (14) : 2439 - 2454
  • [6] Shortcomings of an approximate confidence interval for moment-based estimators of the between-study variance in random-effects meta-analysis
    Hoaglin, David C.
    RESEARCH SYNTHESIS METHODS, 2016, 7 (04) : 459 - 461
  • [7] Bivariate random-effects meta-analysis and the estimation of between-study correlation
    Riley, Richard D.
    Abrams, Keith R.
    Sutton, Alexander J.
    Lambert, Paul C.
    Thompson, John R.
    BMC MEDICAL RESEARCH METHODOLOGY, 2007, 7 (1)
  • [8] Bivariate random-effects meta-analysis and the estimation of between-study correlation
    Richard D Riley
    Keith R Abrams
    Alexander J Sutton
    Paul C Lambert
    John R Thompson
    BMC Medical Research Methodology, 7
  • [9] Confidence intervals for the overall effect size in random-effects meta-analysis
    Sanchez-Meca, Julio
    Marin-Martinez, Fulgencio
    PSYCHOLOGICAL METHODS, 2008, 13 (01) : 31 - 48
  • [10] Prediction intervals for random-effects meta-analysis: A confidence distribution approach
    Nagashima, Kengo
    Noma, Hisashi
    Furukawa, Toshi A.
    STATISTICAL METHODS IN MEDICAL RESEARCH, 2019, 28 (06) : 1689 - 1702