Meta‐analysis of a binary outcome using individual participant data and aggregate data

In this paper, we develop meta-analysis models that synthesize a binary outcome from health-care studies while accounting for participant-level covariates. In particular, we show how to synthesize the observed event-risk across studies while accounting for the within-study association between participant-level covariates and individual event probability. The models are adapted for situations where studies provide individual participant data (IPD), or a mixture of IPD and aggregate data. We show that the availability of IPD is crucial in at least some studies; this allows one to model potentially complex within-study associations and separate them from across-study associations, so as to account for potential ecological bias and study-level confounding. The models can produce pertinent population-level and individual-level results, such as the pooled event-risk and the covariate-specific event probability for an individual. Application is made to 14 studies of traumatic brain injury, where IPD are available for four studies and the six-month mortality risk is synthesized in relation to individual age. The results show that as individual age increases the probability of six-month mortality also increases; further, the models reveal clear evidence of ecological bias, with the mean age in each study additionally influencing an individual's mortality probability. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

[1]  D. Barr,et al.  Mean and Variance of Truncated Normal Distributions , 1999 .

[2]  Andrew Thomas,et al.  WinBUGS - A Bayesian modelling framework: Concepts, structure, and extensibility , 2000, Stat. Comput..

[3]  Paul Landais,et al.  Meta-regression detected associations between heterogeneous treatment effects and study-level, but not patient-level, factors. , 2004, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[4]  B. Leroux,et al.  Between-subject and within-subject Statistical Information in Dental Research , 2000, Journal of dental research.

[5]  S Greenland,et al.  A critical look at methods for handling missing covariates in epidemiologic regression analyses. , 1995, American journal of epidemiology.

[6]  D Hémon,et al.  Comparison of relative risks obtained in ecological and individual studies: some methodological considerations. , 1987, International journal of epidemiology.

[7]  T. Dwyer,et al.  A discussion of some statistical methods for separating within-pair associations from associations among all twins in research on fetal origins of disease. , 2005, Paediatric and perinatal epidemiology.

[8]  A J Sutton,et al.  Meta‐analysis of individual‐ and aggregate‐level data , 2008, Statistics in medicine.

[9]  P. Albert,et al.  Models for longitudinal data: a generalized estimating equation approach. , 1988, Biometrics.

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

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

[12]  M C Simmonds,et al.  Covariate heterogeneity in meta‐analysis: Criteria for deciding between meta‐regression and individual patient data , 2007, Statistics in medicine.

[13]  Simon G Thompson,et al.  Flexible parametric models for random‐effects distributions , 2008, Statistics in medicine.

[14]  Ian R White,et al.  Adjusting for partially missing baseline measurements in randomized trials , 2005, Statistics in medicine.

[15]  S Greenland,et al.  Ecological bias, confounding, and effect modification. , 1989, International journal of epidemiology.

[16]  Sander Greenland,et al.  A review of multilevel theory for ecologic analyses , 2002, Statistics in medicine.

[17]  Michael K Parides,et al.  Separation of individual‐level and cluster‐level covariate effects in regression analysis of correlated data , 2003, Statistics in medicine.

[18]  E W Steyerberg,et al.  See Blockindiscussions, Blockinstats, Blockinand Blockinauthor Blockinprofiles Blockinfor Blockinthis Blockinpublication Prognostic Blockinmodels Blockinbased Blockinon Blockinliterature Blockinand Individual Blockinpatient Blockindata Blockinin Blockinlogistic Blockinregression Analysis Article Blo , 2022 .

[19]  C S Berkey,et al.  A random-effects regression model for meta-analysis. , 1995, Statistics in medicine.

[20]  Simon G Thompson,et al.  Can meta-analysis help target interventions at individuals most likely to benefit? , 2005, The Lancet.

[21]  C. Carlsson,et al.  Factors Affecting the Clinical Course of Patients with Severe Head Injuries , 1968 .

[22]  J. Habbema,et al.  Patient age and outcome following severe traumatic brain injury: an analysis of 5600 patients. , 2003, Journal of neurosurgery.

[23]  J. Kalbfleisch,et al.  A Comparison of Cluster-Specific and Population-Averaged Approaches for Analyzing Correlated Binary Data , 1991 .

[24]  P C Lambert,et al.  A comparison of summary patient-level covariates in meta-regression with individual patient data meta-analysis. , 2002, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[25]  Richard D Riley,et al.  Meta‐analysis of diagnostic test studies using individual patient data and aggregate data , 2008, Statistics in medicine.

[26]  David J Spiegelhalter,et al.  A re-evaluation of random-effects meta-analysis , 2009, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series A,.

[27]  Sylvia Richardson,et al.  Improving ecological inference using individual‐level data , 2006, Statistics in medicine.

[28]  D. Bates,et al.  Approximations to the Log-Likelihood Function in the Nonlinear Mixed-Effects Model , 1995 .

[29]  H. Goldstein,et al.  Meta‐analysis using multilevel models with an application to the study of class size effects , 2000 .

[30]  Christopher H Schmid,et al.  Summing up evidence: one answer is not always enough , 1998, The Lancet.

[31]  Harold I Feldman,et al.  Individual patient‐ versus group‐level data meta‐regressions for the investigation of treatment effect modifiers: ecological bias rears its ugly head , 2002, Statistics in medicine.

[32]  Richard D Riley,et al.  Evidence synthesis combining individual patient data and aggregate data: a systematic review identified current practice and possible methods. , 2007, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[33]  W Vach,et al.  Biased estimation of the odds ratio in case-control studies due to the use of ad hoc methods of correcting for missing values for confounding variables. , 1991, American journal of epidemiology.

[34]  J. Kalbfleisch,et al.  Between- and within-cluster covariate effects in the analysis of clustered data. , 1998, Biometrics.

[35]  D. Spiegelhalter,et al.  Bayesian Approaches to Clinical Trials and Health-Care Evaluation: Spiegelhalter/Clinical Trials and Health-Care Evaluation , 2004 .

[36]  R. Riley,et al.  Meta-analysis of individual participant data: rationale, conduct, and reporting , 2010, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[37]  Richard D Riley,et al.  Meta‐analysis of continuous outcomes combining individual patient data and aggregate data , 2008, Statistics in medicine.

[38]  A E Ades,et al.  The Interpretation of Random-Effects Meta-Analysis in Decision Models , 2005, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.