Heterogeneity Measure in Meta-analysis without Study-specific Variance Information

被引:0
作者
Sangnawakij, P. [1 ]
Sittimongkol, R. [1 ]
机构
[1] Thammasat Univ, Dept Math & Stat, Pathum Thani 12120, Thailand
关键词
between-study coefficient of variation; mean difference; missing variance data; profile likelihood; serum creatinine; ALGORITHM;
D O I
10.1134/S1995080224600262
中图分类号
O1 [数学];
学科分类号
0701 ; 070101 ;
摘要
Assessing heterogeneity between the independent studies in a meta-analysis plays a critical role in quantifying the amount of dispersion. The well-known Higgins' I2 statistic has been used most often for measuring heterogeneity. However, the problem of the within-study variances involved in this measure is discussed, which leads to misinterpretation. Alternatively, the between-study coefficient of variation, the ratio of the standard deviation of the random effects to the effect, is of interest. This current work is motivated by meta-analytic data on continuous outcomes reported only the sample means and sample sizes. No sampling variance estimate is available in the studies. In such a case, we introduce the mean difference estimator based on the profile likelihood and bootstrap methods and propose the coefficient of variation estimator for measuring the heterogeneity of the mean differences. The statistical power of the coefficient of variation is determined based on simulations. The results indicate that the estimated between-study coefficient of variation derived from maximum profile likelihood estimation has a lower bias than that obtained from bootstrap estimation. The Wald-type confidence interval using variance estimation derived from the delta method provides a suitable coverage probability and has a short length interval.
引用
收藏
页码:825 / 838
页数:14
相关论文
共 46 条
[31]   Meta-analysis of the difference of medians [J].
McGrath, Sean ;
Sohn, Hojoon ;
Steele, Russell ;
Benedetti, Andrea .
BIOMETRICAL JOURNAL, 2020, 62 (01) :69-98
[32]  
Murphy SA, 2000, J AM STAT ASSOC, V95, P449, DOI 10.2307/2669386
[33]   CONSENSUS VALUES AND WEIGHTING FACTORS [J].
PAULE, RC ;
MANDEL, J .
JOURNAL OF RESEARCH OF THE NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS, 1982, 87 (05) :377-385
[34]   Imputing variance estimates do not alter the conclusions of a meta-analysis with continuous outcomes: a case study of changes in renal function after living kidney donation [J].
Philbrook, H. Thiessen ;
Barrowman, N. ;
Garg, A. X. .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2007, 60 (03) :228-240
[35]  
R Core Team, 2022, R LANG ENV STAT COMP, DOI DOI 10.59350/T79XT-TF203
[36]   Beyond classical meta-analysis: can inadequately reported studies be included? [J].
Robertson, C ;
Idris, NRN ;
Boyle, P .
DRUG DISCOVERY TODAY, 2004, 9 (21) :924-931
[37]   Undue reliance on I2 in assessing heterogeneity may mislead [J].
Ruecker, Gerta ;
Schwarzer, Guido ;
Carpenter, James R. ;
Schumacher, Martin .
BMC MEDICAL RESEARCH METHODOLOGY, 2008, 8 (1)
[38]   On the exact null-distribution of a test for homogeneity of the risk ratio in meta-analysis of studies with rare events [J].
Sangnawakij, Patarawan ;
Bohning, Dankmar ;
Holling, Heinz .
JOURNAL OF STATISTICAL COMPUTATION AND SIMULATION, 2021, 91 (02) :420-434
[39]   Meta-analysis without study-specific variance information: Heterogeneity case [J].
Sangnawakij, Patarawan ;
Bohning, Dankmar ;
Niwitpong, Sa-Aat ;
Adams, Stephen ;
Stanton, Michael ;
Holling, Heinz .
STATISTICAL METHODS IN MEDICAL RESEARCH, 2019, 28 (01) :196-210
[40]   Statistical methodology for estimating the mean difference in a meta-analysis without study-specific variance information [J].
Sangnawakij, Patarawan ;
Bohning, Dankmar ;
Adams, Stephen ;
Stanton, Michael ;
Holling, Heinz .
STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2017, 36 (09) :1395-1413