Hierarchical models in generalized synthesis of evidence: an example based on studies of breast cancer screening.

Evidence regarding the potential benefits of a particular health care intervention is often available from a variety of disparate sources. However, formal synthesis of such evidence has traditionally concentrated almost exclusively on that derived from randomized studies, although for a range of conditions the randomized evidence will be less than adequate due to economic, organizational or ethical considerations. In such situations a formal synthesis of the evidence that is available from observational studies can be valuable whilst awaiting higher quality evidence from randomized trials. Consideration of randomized studies alone may be appropriate when assessing the efficacy of an intervention, but assessment of the effectiveness of such an intervention within a more general target population may be improved by consideration of evidence from non-randomized studies as well. Standard meta-analysis methods may allow for both within- and between-study heterogeneity; however when multiple sources of evidence are considered an extra level of complexity is introduced, namely study type. One possible solution to the problem of making inferences, particularly regarding an overall population effect, in such situations is to model the heterogeneity, both quantitative and qualitative, using a Bayesian hierarchical model. The hierarchical nature of such models specifically allows for the quantitative within and between sources of heterogeneity, whilst the Bayesian approach can accommodate a priori beliefs regarding qualitative differences between the various sources of evidence. The use of such methods in practice is illustrated in the context of screening for breast cancer; in this example evidence is available from both randomized clinical trials and observational studies. A particular appeal of a Bayesian approach for this type of problem lies in the prediction of future benefits likely to be observed in a target population. This approach to health service monitoring in general is discussed.

[1]  J G Thornton,et al.  Bayesian interpretation of trials: the example of intrapartum electronic fetal heart rate monitoring , 2000, BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology.

[2]  Giovanni Parmigiani,et al.  Meta-Analysis of Migraine Headache Treatments: Combining Information from Heterogeneous Designs , 1999 .

[3]  Anthony O'Hagan,et al.  Eliciting expert beliefs in substantial practical applications , 1998 .

[4]  Stephen P. Brooks,et al.  Markov chain Monte Carlo method and its application , 1998 .

[5]  K Abrams,et al.  Approximate Bayesian inference for random effects meta-analysis. , 1998, Statistics in medicine.

[6]  David R. Jones,et al.  Systematic reviews of trials and other studies. , 1998, Health technology assessment.

[7]  J Lipscomb,et al.  Assessing Uncertainty in Cost-Effectiveness Analyses , 1997, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[8]  L. Liu,et al.  Non-parametric Bayesian approach to hazard regression: a case study with a large number of missing covariate values. , 1996, Statistics in medicine.

[9]  A. Gulsvik,et al.  The semi-proportional hazards model revisited: practical reparametrizations. , 1996, Statistics in medicine.

[10]  Wing Hung Wong,et al.  Bayesian Analysis in Applications of Hierarchical Models: Issues and Methods , 1996 .

[11]  A. Gelfand,et al.  Efficient parametrisations for normal linear mixed models , 1995 .

[12]  W. Rosenberg,et al.  Evidence based medicine: an approach to clinical problem-solving , 1995, BMJ.

[13]  R E Hendrick,et al.  Benefit of mammography screening in women ages 40 to 49 Years. Current evidence from randomized controlled trials , 1995, Cancer.

[14]  David R. Jones,et al.  Meta-analysis: weighing the evidence. , 1995, Statistics in medicine.

[15]  S. Rubin,et al.  Efficacy of screening mammography. A meta-analysis. , 1995, JAMA.

[16]  Bradley P. Carlin,et al.  Markov Chain Monte Carlo conver-gence diagnostics: a comparative review , 1996 .

[17]  Colin B. Begg,et al.  Random Effects Models for Combining Results from Controlled and Uncontrolled Studies in a Meta-Analysis , 1994 .

[18]  S. Pocock,et al.  Environmental lead and children's intelligence: a systematic review of the epidemiological evidence , 1994, BMJ.

[19]  N. Black Experimental and observational methods of evaluation , 1994, BMJ.

[20]  N. Thatcher,et al.  Conducting clinical research in the new NHS: the model of cancer , 1994, BMJ.

[21]  J. Austoker Cancer Prevention in Primary Care: Screening and self examination for breast cancer , 1994, BMJ.

[22]  Walter R. Gilks,et al.  A Language and Program for Complex Bayesian Modelling , 1994 .

[23]  A. M. Chouuillett,et al.  Management of breast cancer in southeast England , 1994, BMJ.

[24]  D. Ketley,et al.  Impact of clinical trials on clinical practice: example of thrombolysis for acute myocardial infarction , 1993, The Lancet.

[25]  E. Chelimsky,et al.  Cross-design Synthesis: A New Form of Meta-analysis for Combining Results from Randomized Clinical Trials and Medical-practice Databases , 1993, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[26]  F. Song,et al.  Cholesterol lowering and mortality: the importance of considering initial level of risk. , 1993, BMJ.

[27]  Eleanor Chelimsky,et al.  Cross design synthesis , 1993, The Lancet.

[28]  M. Parmar,et al.  Meta-analysis of the literature or of individual patient data: is there a difference? , 1993, The Lancet.

[29]  R Peto,et al.  Large-scale randomized evidence: large, simple trials and overviews of trials. , 1993, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.

[30]  D. Rubin,et al.  Inference from Iterative Simulation Using Multiple Sequences , 1992 .

[31]  T C Chalmers,et al.  Cumulative meta-analysis of therapeutic trials for myocardial infarction. , 1992, The New England journal of medicine.

[32]  Lesley Rushton,et al.  Oral contraceptive use and breast cancer risk: a meta‐analysis of variations with age at diagnosis, parity and total duration of oral contraceptive use , 1992 .

[33]  J. Carlin Meta-analysis for 2 x 2 tables: a Bayesian approach. , 1992, Statistics in medicine.

[34]  C B Begg,et al.  A model for incorporating historical controls into a meta-analysis. , 1991, Biometrics.

[35]  M. Law,et al.  By how much does dietary salt reduction lower blood pressure? I--Analysis of observational data among populations. , 1991, BMJ.

[36]  N. Day Screening for breast cancer. , 1991, British medical bulletin.

[37]  J. Ferguson,et al.  Analysis of The National Institutes of Health Medicare Coverage Assessment , 1990, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[38]  Ross D. Shachter,et al.  A Bayesian Method for Synthesizing Evidence: The Confidence Profile Method , 1990, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[39]  David M. Eddy,et al.  The Confidence Profile Method: A Bayesian Method for Assessing Health Technologies , 1989, Oper. Res..

[40]  J. Q. Smith Decision Analysis: A Bayesian Approach , 1988 .

[41]  Adrian F. M. Smith,et al.  Bayesian computation via the gibbs sampler and related markov chain monte carlo methods (with discus , 1993 .

[42]  C. N. Morris,et al.  The calculation of posterior distributions by data augmentation , 1987 .

[43]  R Peto,et al.  Why do we need systematic overviews of randomized trials? , 1987, Statistics in medicine.

[44]  T. Chalmers,et al.  Meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials. , 1987, The New England journal of medicine.

[45]  C. Morris Parametric Empirical Bayes Inference: Theory and Applications , 1983 .