Bivariate random-effects meta-analysis and the estimation of between-study correlation
نویسندگان
چکیده
BACKGROUND When multiple endpoints are of interest in evidence synthesis, a multivariate meta-analysis can jointly synthesise those endpoints and utilise their correlation. A multivariate random-effects meta-analysis must incorporate and estimate the between-study correlation (rhoB). METHODS In this paper we assess maximum likelihood estimation of a general normal model and a generalised model for bivariate random-effects meta-analysis (BRMA). We consider two applied examples, one involving a diagnostic marker and the other a surrogate outcome. These motivate a simulation study where estimation properties from BRMA are compared with those from two separate univariate random-effects meta-analyses (URMAs), the traditional approach. RESULTS The normal BRMA model estimates rhoB as -1 in both applied examples. Analytically we show this is due to the maximum likelihood estimator sensibly truncating the between-study covariance matrix on the boundary of its parameter space. Our simulations reveal this commonly occurs when the number of studies is small or the within-study variation is relatively large; it also causes upwardly biased between-study variance estimates, which are inflated to compensate for the restriction on rhoB. Importantly, this does not induce any systematic bias in the pooled estimates and produces conservative standard errors and mean-square errors. Furthermore, the normal BRMA is preferable to two normal URMAs; the mean-square error and standard error of pooled estimates is generally smaller in the BRMA, especially given data missing at random. For meta-analysis of proportions we then show that a generalised BRMA model is better still. This correctly uses a binomial rather than normal distribution, and produces better estimates than the normal BRMA and also two generalised URMAs; however the model may sometimes not converge due to difficulties estimating rhoB. CONCLUSION A BRMA model offers numerous advantages over separate univariate synthesises; this paper highlights some of these benefits in both a normal and generalised modelling framework, and examines the estimation of between-study correlation to aid practitioners.
منابع مشابه
Meta-analytic interval estimation for bivariate correlations.
The currently available meta-analytic methods for correlations have restrictive assumptions. The fixed-effects methods assume equal population correlations and exhibit poor performance under correlation heterogeneity. The random-effects methods do not assume correlation homogeneity but are based on an equally unrealistic assumption that the selected studies are a random sample from a well-defin...
متن کاملAn alternative model for bivariate random-effects meta-analysis when the within-study correlations are unknown.
Multivariate meta-analysis models can be used to synthesize multiple, correlated endpoints such as overall and disease-free survival. A hierarchical framework for multivariate random-effects meta-analysis includes both within-study and between-study correlation. The within-study correlations are assumed known, but they are usually unavailable, which limits the multivariate approach in practice....
متن کاملBeyond the Bench: Hunting Down Fugitive Literature
Background: When multiple endpoints are of interest in evidence synthesis, a multivariate meta-analysis can jointly synthesise those endpoints and utilise their correlation. A multivariate random-effects metaanalysis must incorporate and estimate the between-study correlation (ρB). Methods: In this paper we assess maximum likelihood estimation of a general normal model and a generalised model f...
متن کاملBivariate random effects models for meta-analysis of comparative studies with binary outcomes: methods for the absolute risk difference and relative risk.
Multivariate meta-analysis is increasingly utilised in biomedical research to combine data of multiple comparative clinical studies for evaluating drug efficacy and safety profile. When the probability of the event of interest is rare, or when the individual study sample sizes are small, a substantial proportion of studies may not have any event of interest. Conventional meta-analysis methods e...
متن کاملBivariate random-effects meta-analysis of sensitivity and specificity with the Bayesian SAS PROC MCMC: methodology and empirical evaluation in 50 meta-analyses.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE Meta-analysis allows for summarizing the sensitivities and specificities from several primary diagnostic test accuracy studies quantitatively. This article presents and evaluates a full Bayesian method for bivariate random-effects meta-analysis of sensitivity and specificity with SAS PROC MCMC. METHODS First, the formula of the bivariate random-effects model is presen...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
برای دانلود متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید
ثبت ناماگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید
ورودعنوان ژورنال:
- BMC Medical Research Methodology
دوره 7 شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 2007