A comparison of bootstrap approaches for homogeneity test based on dichotomous outcome in meta-analysis

被引:0
|
作者
Lee, J. Y. [1 ]
Shen, P. S. [2 ]
Cheng, K. F. [3 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Feng Chia Univ, Dept Stat, 100 Wenhwa Rd, Taichung 40724, Taiwan
[2] Tunghai Univ, Dept Stat, Taichung, Taiwan
[3] Taipei Med Univ, Biostat Ctr, Taipei, Taiwan
[4] Asia Univ, Dept Business Adm, Taichung, Taiwan
关键词
Bootstrap; Dichotomous outcome; Homogeneity test; Meta-analysis; odds ratio; RANDOM-EFFECTS MODEL; CONFIDENCE-INTERVALS; CLINICAL-TRIALS; HETEROGENEITY; VARIANCE;
D O I
10.1080/03610918.2021.1955266
中图分类号
O21 [概率论与数理统计]; C8 [统计学];
学科分类号
020208 ; 070103 ; 0714 ;
摘要
Meta-analysis is a useful research methodology which combines results of multiple studies to estimate means of outcomes of interest. To effectively conduct a meta-analysis, it is critical to assess whether study homogeneity is a reasonable assumption. In literature, many approaches have been proposed to estimate the between-study variance and test the assumption of study homogeneity. One approach is the parametric bootstrap method, which has the disadvantage of underestimating type I error rates at small sample size. In this article, we propose a novel bootstrap method to improve the shortcomings of the parametric bootstrap. We focus on testing homogeneity of the odds-ratio in different studies. In our approach, we first estimate response probabilities in the 2 x 2 tables under the assumption of homogeneity and then generate bootstrap samples based on the estimated probabilities. The performance of the novel bootstrap is evaluated through simulation studies conducted based on Cochran Q-statistics and several commonly used heterogeneity estimators. Simulation results show that Cochran Q-statistics based on both bootstrap methods properly control type I error rate except in the situation where both event probability and sample size are small. In general, the novel bootstrap tends to overestimate type I error while the parametric bootstrap tends to underestimate type I error. However, overestimation does not occur when using the novel bootstrap combined with tests based on the ML and REML. In this case, the novel bootstrap method controls type I error rates better than the parametric bootstrap and is as powerful as the parametric bootstrap. We illustrate the proposed method using two real data sets.
引用
收藏
页码:4218 / 4229
页数:12
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] A comparison of hypothesis tests for homogeneity in meta-analysis with focus on rare binary events
    Zhang, Chiyu
    Wang, Xinlei
    Chen, Min
    Wang, Tao
    RESEARCH SYNTHESIS METHODS, 2021, 12 (04) : 408 - 428
  • [2] Bootstrap-Based Between-Study Heterogeneity Tests in Meta-Analysis
    Du, Han
    Jiang, Ge
    Ke, Zijun
    MULTIVARIATE BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH, 2023, 58 (03) : 484 - 503
  • [3] A comparison of confidence distribution approaches for rare event meta-analysis
    Zabriskie, Brinley N.
    Corcoran, Chris
    Senchaudhuri, Pralay
    STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2021, 40 (24) : 5276 - 5297
  • [4] Using multiple group modeling to test moderators in meta-analysis
    Schoemann, Alexander M.
    RESEARCH SYNTHESIS METHODS, 2016, 7 (04) : 387 - 401
  • [5] Bayesian approaches to fixed effects meta-analysis
    Islas, Clara Dominguez
    Rice, Kenneth M.
    RESEARCH SYNTHESIS METHODS, 2022, 13 (04) : 520 - 532
  • [6] Data-generating models of dichotomous outcomes: Heterogeneity in simulation studies for a random-effects meta-analysis
    Pateras, Konstantinos
    Nikolakopoulos, Stavros
    Roes, Kit
    STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2018, 37 (07) : 1115 - 1124
  • [7] HELOW: A program for testing extreme homogeneity in meta-analysis
    Zintzaras, Elias
    Ioannidis, John P.
    COMPUTER METHODS AND PROGRAMS IN BIOMEDICINE, 2014, 117 (02) : 383 - 386
  • [8] Introduction, comparison, and validation of Meta-Essentials: A free and simple tool for meta-analysis
    Suurmond, Robert
    van Rhee, Henk
    Hak, Tony
    RESEARCH SYNTHESIS METHODS, 2017, 8 (04) : 537 - 553
  • [9] Comparing traditional and Bayesian approaches to ecological meta-analysis
    Pappalardo, Paula
    Ogle, Kiona
    Hamman, Elizabeth A.
    Bence, James R.
    Hungate, Bruce A.
    Osenberg, Craig W.
    METHODS IN ECOLOGY AND EVOLUTION, 2020, 11 (10): : 1286 - 1295
  • [10] Investigating the assumption of homogeneity of treatment effects in clinical studies with application to meta-analysis
    Julious, Steven A.
    Whitehead, Anne
    PHARMACEUTICAL STATISTICS, 2012, 11 (01) : 49 - 56