1999
DOI: 10.1002/(sici)1097-0258(19990215)18:3<321::aid-sim28>3.3.co;2-g
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Meta‐analysis: formulating, evaluating, combining, and reporting

Abstract: SUMMARYMeta-analysis involves combining summary information from related but independent studies. The objectives of a meta-analysis include increasing power to detect an overall treatment e ect, estimation of the degree of beneÿt associated with a particular study treatment, assessment of the amount of variability between studies, or identiÿcation of study characteristics associated with particularly e ective treatments. This article presents a tutorial on meta-analysis intended for anyone with a mathematical … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

1
403
0
35

Year Published

2000
2000
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
10

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 317 publications
(439 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
1
403
0
35
Order By: Relevance
“…As we assumed variability to be due to both sampling error and random differences across studies, to combine study-to-study variations data were fitted to a random effects model as described by Fleiss (Fleiss, 1993), which provides more conservative estimates than a fixed effects model. Random effects are also more appropriate when heterogeneity is present in the results (Normand, 1999).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As we assumed variability to be due to both sampling error and random differences across studies, to combine study-to-study variations data were fitted to a random effects model as described by Fleiss (Fleiss, 1993), which provides more conservative estimates than a fixed effects model. Random effects are also more appropriate when heterogeneity is present in the results (Normand, 1999).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A SIR adjusted for study was then calculated, using either a fixed or a random-effects model, according to the results of the Cochran's test (Normand, 1999).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The standard deviation of the difference in plasma cholesterol changes between groups I and C was estimated by standard equations from the reported standard error, standard deviations or 95% CIs of the changes within the groups and differences between the groups. Standard methods of meta-analysis (Normand, 1999) were used to carry out a chi-square test of homogeneity of study means, a ®xed effects estimate, standard error and test of the difference in cholesterol change between intervention and control treatment, and a random effects estimate and standard error. In either case, the studies are combined to obtain an overall estimate, with individual studies weighted according to their sample size and the variance of their estimated effects.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%