...
首页> 外文期刊>Systematic Reviews >Do alternative methods for analysing count data produce similar estimates? Implications for meta-analyses
【24h】

Do alternative methods for analysing count data produce similar estimates? Implications for meta-analyses

机译:用于分析计数数据的替代方法产生类似的估计值?对Meta-Analys的影响

获取原文
           

摘要

Many randomised trials have count outcomes, such as the number of falls or the number of asthma exacerbations. These outcomes have been treated as counts, continuous outcomes or dichotomised and analysed using a variety of analytical methods. This study examines whether different methods of analysis yield estimates of intervention effect that are similar enough to be reasonably pooled in a meta-analysis. Data were simulated for 10,000 randomised trials under three different amounts of overdispersion, four different event rates and two effect sizes. Each simulated trial was analysed using nine different methods of analysis: rate ratio, Poisson regression, negative binomial regression, risk ratio from dichotomised data, survival to the first event, two methods of adjusting for multiple survival times, ratio of means and ratio of medians. Individual patient data was gathered from eight fall prevention trials, and similar analyses were undertaken. All methods produced similar effect sizes when there was no difference between treatments. Results were similar when there was a moderate difference with two exceptions when the event became more common: (1) risk ratios computed from dichotomised count outcomes and hazard ratios from survival analysis of the time to the first event yielded intervention effects that differed from rate ratios estimated from the negative binomial model (reference model) and (2) the precision of the estimates differed depending on the method used, which may affect both the pooled intervention effect and the observed heterogeneity. The results of the case study of individual data from eight trials evaluating exercise programmes to prevent falls in older people supported the simulation study findings. Information about the differences in treatments is lost when event rates increase and the outcome is dichotomised or time to the first event is analysed otherwise similar results are obtained. Further research is needed to examine the effect of differing variances from the different methods on the confidence intervals of pooled estimates.
机译:许多随机试验有数量的结果,例如跌倒的数量或哮喘恶化的数量。这些结果已被视为计数,连续结果或二分法,并使用各种分析方法进行分析。本研究检查了不同的分析方法是否具有足够相似的干预效果的估计,以便在荟萃分析中合理地汇总。在三种不同量的过度分解,四种不同的事件速率和两个效果大小下模拟了10,000个随机试验的数据。使用九种不同的分析方法分析每个模拟试验:速率比,泊松回归,负二级回归,风险比与二分辨物数据,生存到第一次事件,两种调整多重存活时间的方法,均值和中位数的含量和比例的调整方法。 。各个患者数据收集来自八项秋季预防试验,并进行了类似的分析。当治疗不差异时,所有方法都产生了类似的效果尺寸。当事件变得更加常见的情况下,当事件变得更加常见时,结果类似:(1)从二分作化计数结果和危险比从生存分析到第一个事件的时间分析,产生了与速率比率不同的干预效果从负二项式模型(参考模型)和(2)估计的估计的精度根据所用方法而不同,这可能影响汇总干预效果和观察到的异质性。从八次试验评估运动方案的单个数据的案例研究结果,以防止老年人跌落支持模拟研究结果。当事件率增加时,有关治疗的差异的信息丢失,并且将结果分析或对第一个事件的时间进行分析,以外地获得类似的结果。需要进一步研究来检查与汇总估计的置信区间不同方法不同的差异的效果。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号