We found a match
Your institution may have rights to this item. Sign in to continue.
- Title
Robustness Assessments Are Needed to Reduce Bias in Meta-Analyses That Include Zero-Event Randomized Trials.
- Authors
Keus, F.; Wetterslev, J.; Gluud, C.; Gooszen, H. G.; van Laarhoven, C. J. H. M.
- Abstract
OBJECTIVES:Meta-analysis of randomized trials with binary data can use a variety of statistical methods. Zero-event trials may create analytic problems. We explored how different methods may impact inferences from meta-analyses containing zero-event trials.METHODS:Five levels of statistical methods are identified for meta-analysis with zero-event trials, leading to numerous data analyses. We used the binary outcomes from our Cochrane review of randomized trials of laparoscopic vs. small-incision cholecystectomy for patients with symptomatic cholecystolithiasis to illustrate the influence of statistical method on inference.RESULTS:In seven meta-analyses of seven outcomes from 15 trials, there were zero-event trials in 0 to 71.4% of the trials. We found inconsistency in significance in one of seven outcomes (14%; 95% confidence limit 0.4%–57.9%). There was also considerable variability in the confidence limits, the intervention-effect estimates, and heterogeneity for all outcomes.CONCLUSIONS:The statistical method may influence the inference drawn from a meta-analysis that includes zero-event trials. Robustness assessments are needed to reduce bias in meta-analyses that include zero-event trials.Am J Gastroenterol 2009; 104: 546–551; doi:10.1038/ajg.2008.22
- Subjects
MEDICAL quality control; HEALTH outcome assessment; CHOLECYSTECTOMY; RANDOMIZED controlled trials; HEALTH care intervention (Social services)
- Publication
American Journal of Gastroenterology (Springer Nature), 2009, Vol 104, Issue 3, p546
- ISSN
0002-9270
- Publication type
Article
- DOI
10.1038/ajg.2008.22