Harmonizing Survey Data

Granda, Peter; Wolf, Christof; Hadorn, Reto

doi:10.1002/9780470609927.ch17

Cited by 49 publications

(37 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Of the 63 articles, 53 (84.1%) met the inclusion criteria [2,3,8,18,52–100]. The 10 excluded articles are listed in online Appendix A.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Seven of the 53 articles (13.2%) described the methods used for statistical harmonization [54,59,71,73,83,84,98] (Table 1). Ten articles (18.9 %) focused on the conduct of IPD meta-analysis [2,3,60,64,70,76,90,92,99,100] and 6 articles (11.3%) focused on IPD meta-analysis methodology [8,18,57,74,77,79]. Six articles (11.3%) reviewed imputation methods and the appropriateness of their use [58,66,86,91,94,95] and 2 articles (3.8%) described methods for evaluating equivalence of item functioning across study subgroups [62,96].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These harmonization steps may have, in fact, been conducted, but not reported. Granda, et al [18] describe general approaches to harmonization and issues around determining cultural equivalence as a component of inferential equivalence. For example, Pluijm et al [87] describe harmonizing measures of activities of daily living in older people across six countries.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For the purpose of this review, harmonization was defined as “procedures aimed at achieving and improving the comparability of different surveys” [18]. This definition was adapted to include study designs other than surveys.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Statistical approaches to harmonize data on cognitive measures in systematic reviews are rarely reported

Griffith

Heuvel

Fortier

et al. 2015

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives To identify statistical methods for harmonization which could be used in the context of summary data and individual participant data meta-analysis of cognitive measures. Study Design and Setting Environmental scan methods were used to conduct two reviews to identify: 1) studies that quantitatively combined data on cognition, and 2) general literature on statistical methods for data harmonization. Search results were rapidly screened to identify articles of relevance. Results All 33 meta-analyses combining cognition measures either restricted their analyses to a subset of studies using a common measure or combined standardized effect sizes across studies; none reported their harmonization steps prior to producing summary effects. In the second scan, three general classes of statistical harmonization models were identified: 1) standardization methods, 2) latent variable models, and 3) multiple imputation models; few publications compared methods. Conclusions Although it is an implicit part of conducting a meta-analysis or pooled analysis, the methods used to assess inferential equivalence of complex constructs are rarely reported or discussed. Progress in this area will be supported by guidelines for the conduct and reporting of the data harmonization and integration and by evaluating and developing statistical approaches to harmonization.

show abstract

“…Of the 63 articles, 53 (84.1%) met the inclusion criteria [2,3,8,18,52–100]. The 10 excluded articles are listed in online Appendix A.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Statistical approaches to harmonize data on cognitive measures in systematic reviews are rarely reported

Griffith

Heuvel

Fortier

et al. 2015

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Data harmonization can be achieved through different approaches, each with their own shortcomings and advantages [9][10][11]. Approaches to harmonization can be characterized as being either (a) prospective or retrospective, and (b) stringent or flexible.…”

Section: Approaches To Data Harmonizationmentioning

confidence: 99%