Basics of meta‐analysis: I2 is not an absolute measure of heterogeneity

When we speak about heterogeneity in a meta-analysis, our intent is usually to understand the substantive implications of the heterogeneity. If an intervention yields a mean effect size of 50 points, we want to know if the effect size in different populations varies from 40 to 60, or from 10 to 90, because this speaks to the potential utility of the intervention. While there is a common belief that the I2 statistic provides this information, it actually does not. In this example, if we are told that I2 is 50%, we have no way of knowing if the effects range from 40 to 60, or from 10 to 90, or across some other range. Rather, if we want to communicate the predicted range of effects, then we should simply report this range. This gives readers the information they think is being captured by I2 and does so in a way that is concise and unambiguous. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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

[2]  Richard D Riley,et al.  Interpretation of random effects meta-analyses , 2011, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[3]  H. Heinzl,et al.  A simulation study comparing properties of heterogeneity measures in meta‐analyses , 2006, Statistics in medicine.

[4]  Ivan Figueira,et al.  Posttraumatic stress disorder in parents of children with chronic illnesses: a meta-analysis. , 2009, Health psychology : official journal of the Division of Health Psychology, American Psychological Association.

[5]  Mohammed T Ansari,et al.  Oral Phosphodiesterase-5 Inhibitors and Hormonal Treatments for Erectile Dysfunction: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis , 2009, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[6]  M. Coory,et al.  Comment on: Heterogeneity in meta-analysis should be expected and appropriately quantified. , 2010, International journal of epidemiology.

[7]  J. Higgins,et al.  Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions , 2010, International Coaching Psychology Review.

[8]  Gerta Rücker,et al.  Bmc Medical Research Methodology Open Access Undue Reliance on I 2 in Assessing Heterogeneity May Mislead , 2022 .

[9]  D. Altman,et al.  Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses , 2003, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

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

[11]  David Rigau,et al.  Efficacy of Methylphenidate for Adults with Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder , 2011, CNS drugs.

[12]  Douglas G. Bonett,et al.  The Moderating Effects of Employee Tenure on the Relation Between Organizational Commitment and Job Performance: A Meta-Analysis , 2002 .

[13]  S. Thompson,et al.  Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta‐analysis , 2002, Statistics in medicine.

[14]  Douglas G. Altman,et al.  Chapter 9: Analysing Data and Undertaking Meta-Analyses , 2008 .