Analysing the relationship between treatment effect and underlying risk in meta-analysis: comparison and development of approaches
- 15 December 2000
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wiley in Statistics in Medicine
- Vol. 19 (23) , 3251-3274
- https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-0258(20001215)19:23<3251::aid-sim625>3.0.co;2-2
Abstract
Three approaches for estimating the relationship between treatment effect and underlying risk in a meta-analysis of clinical trials have recently been published. The aim of each is to overcome the bias inherent in conventional regressions of treatment effect on control group risk, which arises from the measurement error in the observed control group risks in different trials. Here we describe these published approaches, and compare them with respect to their underlying models and methods of implementation. The underlying model for one of them is shown to be seriously flawed, while the other two are both statistically more appropriate than the conventional approaches, and differ from each other in only two assumptions. Both may be implemented using the Gibbs sampling algorithm in BUGS, and are exemplified here using a meta-analysis of mortality and bleeding data in trials of sclerotherapy for patients with cirrhosis. One approach is developed further; for the illustrative example considered, it is shown to be robust to different choices of prior distributions for the model parameters, and to the assumption of a linear relationship on a log-odds scale. It can also be used to estimate the level of underlying risk (and its standard error) at which the treatment effect crosses from benefit to harm, and other trial-level covariates may be included in the model as confounders. The BUGS code is provided in an Appendix, to enable applied researchers to perform the various analyses described.Keywords
This publication has 22 references indexed in Scilit:
- A Logistic Model for Trend in 2 x 2 x K Tables with Applications to Meta- AnalysesPublished by JSTOR ,1997
- The relation between treatment benefit and underlying risk in meta-analysisBMJ, 1996
- Bayesian approaches to random‐effects meta‐analysis: A comparative studyStatistics in Medicine, 1995
- A random‐effects regression model for meta‐analysisStatistics in Medicine, 1995
- Systematic Review: Why sources of heterogeneity in meta-analysis should be investigatedBMJ, 1994
- Importance of trends in the interpretation of an overall odds ratio in the meta‐analysis of clinical trialsStatistics in Medicine, 1994
- A bivariate approach to meta‐analysisStatistics in Medicine, 1993
- Inference from Iterative Simulation Using Multiple SequencesStatistical Science, 1992
- Methods for assessing whether change depends on initial valueStatistics in Medicine, 1988
- Meta-analysis in clinical trialsControlled Clinical Trials, 1986