首页> 外文期刊>BMC Medical Research Methodology >Multivariate meta-analysis of critical care meta-analyses: a meta-epidemiological study
【24h】

Multivariate meta-analysis of critical care meta-analyses: a meta-epidemiological study

机译:关键护理荟萃分析的多变量荟萃分析:荟萃流行病学研究

获取原文
           

摘要

Meta-analyses typically consider multiple outcomes and report univariate effect sizes considered as independent. Multivariate meta-analysis (MVMA) incorporates outcome correlation and synthesises direct evidence and related outcome estimates within a single analysis. In a series of meta-analyses from the critically ill literature, the current study contrasts multiple univariate effect estimates and their precision with those derived from MVMA. A previous meta-epidemiological study was used to identify meta-analyses with either one or two secondary outcomes providing sufficient detail to structure bivariate or tri-variate MVMA, with mortality as primary outcome. Analysis was performed using a random effects model for both odds ratio (OR) and risk ratio (RR); borrowing of strength (BoS) between multivariate outcome estimates was reported. Estimate comparisons, β coefficients, standard errors (SE) and confidence interval (CI) width, univariate versus multivariate, were performed using Lin’s concordance correlation coefficient (CCC). In bivariate meta-analyses, for OR (n?=?49) and RR (n?=?48), there was substantial concordance (≥?0.69) between estimates; but this was less so for tri-variate meta-analyses for both OR (n?=?25;?≥?0.38) and RR (≥?-0.10; n?=?22). A variable change in the multivariate precision of primary mortality outcome estimates compared with univariate was present for both bivariate and tri-variate meta-analyses and for metrics. For second outcomes, precision tended to decrease and CI width increase for bivariate meta-analyses, but was variable in the tri-variate. For third outcomes, precision increased and CI width decreased. In bivariate meta-analyses, OR coefficient significance reversal, univariate versus MVMA, occurred once for mortality and 6 cases for second outcomes. RR coefficient significance reversal occurred in 4 cases; 2 were discordant with OR. For tri-variate OR meta-analyses reversal of coefficient estimate significance occurred in two cases for mortality, nine cases for second and 7 cases for third outcomes. In RR meta-analyses significance reversals occurred for mortality in 2 cases, 6 cases for second and 3 cases for third; there were 7 discordances with OR. BoS was greater in trivariate MVMAs compared with bivariate and for OR versus RR. MVMA would appear to be the preferred solution to multiple univariate analyses; parameter significance changes may occur. Analytic metric appears to be a determinant.
机译:Meta-Analys通常考虑多种结果,并报告单独的效应大小被认为是独立的。多变量元分析(MVMA)包含结果相关性并合成单一分析中的直接证据和相关结果估计。在从批评性文献中的一系列元分析中,目前的研究对比多变量效应估计和它们与来自MVMA的那些的精度形成鲜明对比。以前的荟萃流行病学研究用于鉴定具有一个或两个二次结果的Meta分析,提供足够的细节,以使成像或三变体MVMA具有死亡率作为主要结果。使用随机效应模型进行分析,用于占多项比(或)和风险比(RR);报告了多元成果估计之间的力量(BOS)。使用LIN的一致性相关系数(CCC)执行估计比较,β系数,标准误差(SE)和置信区间(CI)宽度,单变量与多变量。在双分析中,对于或(n?=?49)和RR(n?=Δ48),估计之间存在大量的一致性(≥≤0.69);但这对TRI变化的META分析或(n?=α25;≥≤0.38)和RR(≥1-0.10; n?=?22)来说较少。对于二元和三变异的Meta-Analys和度量,存在与单变量相比的主要死亡率结果估算的多元性精度的变化。对于第二种结果,精度倾向于减少和CI宽度增加,但在三变体中是可变的。对于第三种结果,精度增加,CI宽度降低。在双分析中,或系数意义逆转,单变量与MVMA相比,发生一次死亡率和6例第二种结果。 RR系数意义逆转4例发生; 2与或不和谐或。对于TRI变化或META分析的逆转系数估计意义在两种情况下发生了两种情况,其中九个案例为第二个和第三个案例。在RR Meta-Analys中,2例死亡率发生意义逆转,第三起2例和3例3例;有7个可调或。与二抗体和饲料或与RR相比,博斯在琐碎的MVMA中更大。 MVMA似乎是多个单变量分析的首选解决方案;可能发生参数意义更改。分析度量似乎是一个决定因素。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号