...
首页> 外文期刊>Statistics in medicine >Issues in the selection of a summary statistic for meta-analysis of clinical trials with binary outcomes.
【24h】

Issues in the selection of a summary statistic for meta-analysis of clinical trials with binary outcomes.

机译:在选择具有二元结果的临床试验的荟萃分析的摘要统计数据时存在问题。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

Meta-analysis of binary data involves the computation of a weighted average of summary statistics calculated for each trial. The selection of the appropriate summary statistic is a subject of debate due to conflicts in the relative importance of mathematical properties and the ability to intuitively interpret results. This paper explores the process of identifying a summary statistic most likely to be consistent across trials when there is variation in control group event rates. Four summary statistics are considered: odds ratios (OR); risk differences (RD) and risk ratios of beneficial (RR(B)); and harmful outcomes (RR(H)). Each summary statistic corresponds to a different pattern of predicted absolute benefit of treatment with variation in baseline risk, the greatest difference in patterns of prediction being between RR(B) and RR(H). Selection of a summary statistic solely based on identification of the best-fitting model by comparing tests of heterogeneity is problematic, principally due to low numbers of trials. It is proposed that choice of a summary statistic should be guided by both empirical evidence and clinically informed debate as to which model is likely to be closest to the expected pattern of treatment benefit across baseline risks. Empirical investigations comparing the four summary statistics on a sample of 551 systematic reviews provide evidence that the RR and OR models are on average more consistent than RD, there being no difference on average between RR and OR. From a second sample of 114 meta-analyses evidence indicates that for interventions aimed at preventing an undesirable event, greatest absolute benefits are observed in trials with the highest baseline event rates, corresponding to the model of constant RR(H). The appropriate selection for a particular meta-analysis may depend on understanding reasons for variation in control group event rates; in some situations uncertainty about the choice of summary statistic will remain.
机译:对二元数据的荟萃分析涉及为每个试验计算的摘要统计的加权平均值。由于数学属性的相对重要性和直观地解释结果的能力存在冲突,因此选择适当的摘要统计量是一个争论的主题。本文探讨了当对照组事件发生率发生变化时,确定汇总统计最有可能在各试验中保持一致的过程。考虑了四个汇总统计数据:优势比(OR);风险差异(RD)和受益人的风险比率(RR(B));和有害结果(RR(H))。每个汇总统计信息对应于基线风险变化的不同的预测绝对收益治疗模式,最大预测模式差异在RR(B)和RR(H)之间。仅由于通过比较异质性测试而仅基于最佳拟合模型的识别来选择摘要统计量存在问题,这主要是由于试验次数少。建议总结统计的选择应以经验证据和临床知情辩论为指导,关于哪种模型可能最接近跨基线风险的预期治疗收益模式。通过对551个系统评价样本中的四个汇总统计数据进行比较的实证研究提供了证据,表明RR和OR模型平均比RD更一致,RR和OR之间的平均值没有差异。从114次荟萃分析的第二个样本中,证据表明,针对旨在预防不良事件的干预措施,在基线事件发生率最高的试验中观察到最大的绝对收益,这与恒定RR(H)模型相对应。进行特定荟萃分析的适当选择可能取决于了解对照组事件发生率变化的原因;在某些情况下,关于汇总统计信息选择的不确定性将仍然存在。

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