Random effects meta‐analysis of event outcome in the framework of the generalized linear mixed model with applications in sparse data

We consider random effects meta-analysis where the outcome variable is the occurrence of some event of interest. The data structures handled are where one has one or more groups in each study, and in each group either the number of subjects with and without the event, or the number of events and the total duration of follow-up is available. Traditionally, the meta-analysis follows the summary measures approach based on the estimates of the outcome measure(s) and the corresponding standard error(s). This approach assumes an approximate normal within-study likelihood and treats the standard errors as known. This approach has several potential disadvantages, such as not accounting for the standard errors being estimated, not accounting for correlation between the estimate and the standard error, the use of an (arbitrary) continuity correction in case of zero events, and the normal approximation being bad in studies with few events. We show that these problems can be overcome in most cases occurring in practice by replacing the approximate normal within-study likelihood by the appropriate exact likelihood. This leads to a generalized linear mixed model that can be fitted in standard statistical software. For instance, in the case of odds ratio meta-analysis, one can use the non-central hypergeometric distribution likelihood leading to mixed-effects conditional logistic regression. For incidence rate ratio meta-analysis, it leads to random effects logistic regression with an offset variable. We also present bivariate and multivariate extensions. We present a number of examples, especially with rare events, among which an example of network meta-analysis.

[1]  Jonathan J. Shuster,et al.  Fixed vs random effects meta‐analysis in rare event studies: The Rosiglitazone link with myocardial infarction and cardiac death , 2007, Statistics in medicine.

[2]  R. N. Kackar,et al.  Approximations for Standard Errors of Estimators of Fixed and Random Effects in Mixed Linear Models , 1984 .

[3]  T. Stijnen,et al.  Anti-infective-treated central venous catheters: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials , 2007, Intensive Care Medicine.

[4]  H C Van Houwelingen,et al.  A bivariate approach to meta-analysis. , 1993, Statistics in medicine.

[5]  T. Stijnen,et al.  Anti-infective-treated central venous catheters for total parenteral nutrition or chemotherapy: a systematic review. , 2008, The Journal of hospital infection.

[6]  David R. Jones,et al.  How vague is vague? A simulation study of the impact of the use of vague prior distributions in MCMC using WinBUGS , 2005, Statistics in medicine.

[7]  D J Spiegelhalter,et al.  Bayesian approaches to random-effects meta-analysis: a comparative study. , 1995, Statistics in medicine.

[8]  N. Breslow Covariance analysis of censored survival data. , 1974, Biometrics.

[9]  J. C. Houwelingen,et al.  Bivariate Random Effects Meta-Analysis of ROC Curves , 2008, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[10]  N. Breslow,et al.  Approximate inference in generalized linear mixed models , 1993 .

[11]  S L Normand,et al.  Meta-analysis: formulating, evaluating, combining, and reporting. , 1999, Statistics in medicine.

[12]  J. Pinheiro,et al.  Efficient Laplacian and Adaptive Gaussian Quadrature Algorithms for Multilevel Generalized Linear Mixed Models , 2006 .

[13]  M. Pritz,et al.  Methods for combining rates from several studies. , 1999, Statistics in medicine.

[14]  G. Samsa,et al.  Alzheimer disease: operating characteristics of PET--a meta-analysis. , 2004, Radiology.

[15]  Noreen Goldman,et al.  An assessment of estimation procedures for multilevel models with binary responses , 1995 .

[16]  H Goldstein,et al.  A multilevel model framework for meta-analysis of clinical trials with binary outcomes. , 2000, Statistics in medicine.

[17]  N. Laird,et al.  Meta-analysis in clinical trials. , 1986, Controlled clinical trials.

[18]  Haitao Chu,et al.  Bivariate meta-analysis of sensitivity and specificity with sparse data: a generalized linear mixed model approach. , 2006, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[19]  Theo Stijnen,et al.  The binomial distribution of meta-analysis was preferred to model within-study variability. , 2008, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[20]  Jonathan J Deeks,et al.  Much ado about nothing: a comparison of the performance of meta‐analytical methods with rare events , 2007, Statistics in medicine.

[21]  Ulrike Dapp,et al.  Development, feasibility and performance of a health risk appraisal questionnaire for older persons , 2007, BMC medical research methodology.

[22]  Joseph Beyene,et al.  Inclusion of zero total event trials in meta-analyses maintains analytic consistency and incorporates all available data , 2007, BMC medical research methodology.

[23]  Richard D Riley,et al.  Beyond the Bench: Hunting Down Fugitive Literature , 2004, Environmental Health Perspectives.

[24]  Andrew L. Rukhin,et al.  Restricted maximum likelihood estimation of a common mean and the Mandel–Paule algorithm , 2000 .

[25]  Theo Stijnen,et al.  Advanced methods in meta‐analysis: multivariate approach and meta‐regression , 2002, Statistics in medicine.

[26]  Raghu Kacker,et al.  Random-effects model for meta-analysis of clinical trials: an update. , 2007, Contemporary clinical trials.

[27]  Penny Whiting,et al.  Metandi: Meta-analysis of Diagnostic Accuracy Using Hierarchical Logistic Regression , 2009 .

[28]  S G Thompson,et al.  A likelihood approach to meta-analysis with random effects. , 1996, Statistics in medicine.

[29]  B H Chang,et al.  Meta‐analysis of binary data: which within study variance estimate to use? , 2001, Statistics in medicine.

[30]  Theo Stijnen,et al.  Combining multiple outcome measures in a meta‐analysis: an application , 2003, Statistics in medicine.

[31]  G. Lu,et al.  Combination of direct and indirect evidence in mixed treatment comparisons , 2004, Statistics in medicine.

[32]  P Flandre,et al.  Estimating the proportion of treatment effect explained by a surrogate marker. , 1999, Statistics in Medicine.

[33]  Alexander J Sutton,et al.  What to add to nothing? Use and avoidance of continuity corrections in meta-analysis of sparse data. , 2004, Statistics in medicine.

[34]  Stephen Senn,et al.  (www.interscience.wiley.com) DOI: 10.1002/sim.2639 Trying to be precise about vagueness , 2022 .

[35]  Lisa A. Weissfeld,et al.  An assessment of the use of the continuity correction for sparse data in meta-analysis , 1996 .

[36]  Chukiat Viwatwongkasem,et al.  Some general points in estimating heterogeneity variance with the DerSimonian-Laird estimator. , 2002, Biostatistics.