scholarly journals Deriving percentage study weights in multi-parameter meta-analysis models: with application to meta-regression, network meta-analysis and one-stage individual participant data models

2017 ◽  
Vol 27 (10) ◽  
pp. 2885-2905 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard D Riley ◽  
Joie Ensor ◽  
Dan Jackson ◽  
Danielle L Burke

Many meta-analysis models contain multiple parameters, for example due to multiple outcomes, multiple treatments or multiple regression coefficients. In particular, meta-regression models may contain multiple study-level covariates, and one-stage individual participant data meta-analysis models may contain multiple patient-level covariates and interactions. Here, we propose how to derive percentage study weights for such situations, in order to reveal the (otherwise hidden) contribution of each study toward the parameter estimates of interest. We assume that studies are independent, and utilise a decomposition of Fisher’s information matrix to decompose the total variance matrix of parameter estimates into study-specific contributions, from which percentage weights are derived. This approach generalises how percentage weights are calculated in a traditional, single parameter meta-analysis model. Application is made to one- and two-stage individual participant data meta-analyses, meta-regression and network (multivariate) meta-analysis of multiple treatments. These reveal percentage study weights toward clinically important estimates, such as summary treatment effects and treatment-covariate interactions, and are especially useful when some studies are potential outliers or at high risk of bias. We also derive percentage study weights toward methodologically interesting measures, such as the magnitude of ecological bias (difference between within-study and across-study associations) and the amount of inconsistency (difference between direct and indirect evidence in a network meta-analysis).

Author(s):  
Lies Declercq ◽  
Laleh Jamshidi ◽  
Belén Fernández Castilla ◽  
Mariola Moeyaert ◽  
S. Natasha Beretvas ◽  
...  

PLoS ONE ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. e60650 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas P. A. Debray ◽  
Karel G. M. Moons ◽  
Ghada Mohammed Abdallah Abo-Zaid ◽  
Hendrik Koffijberg ◽  
Richard David Riley

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ruth Walker ◽  
Lesley Stewart ◽  
Mark Simmonds

Abstract Medical interventions may be more effective in some types of individuals than others and identifying characteristics that modify the effectiveness of an intervention is a cornerstone of precision or stratified medicine. The opportunity for detailed examination of treatment-covariate interactions can be an important driver for undertaking an individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis, rather than a meta-analysis using aggregate data. A number of recent modelling approaches are available. We apply these methods to the Perinatal Antiplatelet Review of International Studies (PARIS) Collaboration IPD dataset and compare estimates between them. We discuss the practical implications of applying these methods, which may be of interest to aid meta-analysists in the use of these, often complex models. Models compared included the two-stage meta-analysis of interaction terms and one-stage models which fit multiple random effects and separate within and between trial information. Models were fitted for nine covariates and five binary outcomes and results compared. Interaction terms produced by the methods were generally consistent. We show that where data are sparse and there is low heterogeneity in the covariate distributions across trials, the meta-analysis of interactions may produce unstable estimates and have issues with convergence. In this IPD dataset, varying assumptions by using multiple random effects in one-stage models or using only within trial information made little difference to the estimates of treatment-covariate interaction. Method choice will depend on datasets characteristics and individual preference.


2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gustav Nilsonne ◽  
Mats Lekander ◽  
Torbjörn Åkerstedt ◽  
John Axelsson ◽  
Michael Ingre

AbstractThe pleiotropic cytokine interleukin-6 (IL-6) has been proposed to contribute to circadian regulation of sleepiness by increasing in the blood at night to signal for sleepiness. Earlier studies have reported diurnal variations of IL-6, but phase estimates are conflicting. We have therefore performed a meta-analysis on the diurnal variation of circulating IL-6. Studies were included if they reported circulating levels of IL-6 recorded at least twice within 24 hours in the same individual. A systematic search resulted in the inclusion of 43 studies with 56 datasets, for a total of 1100 participants. Individual participant data were available from 4 datasets with a total of 56 participants. Mixed-effects meta-regression modelling confirmed that IL-6 varied across the day, the most conspicuous effect being a trough in the morning. These results stand in contrast to earlier findings of a peak in the evening or night, and suggest that diurnal variation should be taken into account in order to avoid confounding in studies of IL-6 in plasma or serum.


PeerJ ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
pp. e6295 ◽  
Author(s):  
Liang-Liang Cheng ◽  
Ke Ju ◽  
Rui-Lie Cai ◽  
Chang Xu

Objective In evidence synthesis practice, dealing with binary rare adverse events (AEs) is a challenging problem. The pooled estimates for rare AEs through traditional inverse variance (IV), Mantel-Haenszel (MH), and Yusuf-Peto (Peto) methods are suboptimal, as the biases tend to be large. We proposed the “one-stage” approach based on multilevel variance component logistic regression (MVCL) to handle this problem. Methods We used simulations to generate trials of individual participant data (IPD) with a series of predefined parameters. We compared the performance of the MVCL “one-stage” approach and the five classical methods (fixed/random effect IV, fixed/random effect MH, and Peto) for rare binary AEs under different scenarios, which included different sample size setting rules, effect sizes, between-study heterogeneity, and numbers of studies in each meta-analysis. The percentage bias, mean square error (MSE), coverage probability, and average width of the 95% confidence intervals were used as performance indicators. Results We set 52 scenarios and each scenario was simulated 1,000 times. Under the rule of three (a sample size setting rule to ensure a 95% chance of detecting at least one AE case), the MVCL “one-stage” IPD method had the lowest percentage bias in most of the situations and the bias remained at a very low level (<10%), when compared to IV, MH, and Peto methods. In addition, the MVCL “one-stage” IPD method generally had the lowest MSE and the narrowest average width of 95% confidence intervals. However, it did not show better coverage probability over the other five methods. Conclusions The MVCL “one-stage” IPD meta-analysis is a useful method to handle binary rare events and superior compared to traditional methods under the rule of three. Further meta-analyses may take account of the “one-stage” IPD method for pooling rare event data.


2018 ◽  
Vol 37 (29) ◽  
pp. 4404-4420 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amardeep Legha ◽  
Richard D. Riley ◽  
Joie Ensor ◽  
Kym I.E. Snell ◽  
Tim P. Morris ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document