Cargando…
A flexible approach to identify interaction effects between moderators in meta‐analysis
In meta‐analytic studies, there are often multiple moderators available (eg, study characteristics). In such cases, traditional meta‐analysis methods often lack sufficient power to investigate interaction effects between moderators, especially high‐order interactions. To overcome this problem, meta‐...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6590644/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30511514 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1334 |
_version_ | 1783429605064966144 |
---|---|
author | Li, Xinru Dusseldorp, Elise Meulman, Jacqueline J. |
author_facet | Li, Xinru Dusseldorp, Elise Meulman, Jacqueline J. |
author_sort | Li, Xinru |
collection | PubMed |
description | In meta‐analytic studies, there are often multiple moderators available (eg, study characteristics). In such cases, traditional meta‐analysis methods often lack sufficient power to investigate interaction effects between moderators, especially high‐order interactions. To overcome this problem, meta‐CART was proposed: an approach that applies classification and regression trees (CART) to identify interactions, and then subgroup meta‐analysis to test the significance of moderator effects. The aim of this study is to improve meta‐CART upon two aspects: 1) to integrate the two steps of the approach into one and 2) to consistently take into account the fixed‐effect or random‐effects assumption in both the the interaction identification and testing process. For fixed effect meta‐CART, weights are applied, and subgroup analysis is adapted. For random effects meta‐CART, a new algorithm has been developed. The performance of the improved meta‐CART was investigated via an extensive simulation study on different types of moderator variables (ie, dichotomous, nominal, ordinal, and continuous variables). The simulation results revealed that the new method can achieve satisfactory performance (power greater than 0.80 and Type I error less than 0.05) if appropriate pruning rule is applied and the number of studies is large enough. The required minimum number of studies ranges from 40 to 120 depending on the complexity and strength of the interaction effects, the within‐study sample size, the type of moderators, and the residual heterogeneity. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6590644 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-65906442019-07-08 A flexible approach to identify interaction effects between moderators in meta‐analysis Li, Xinru Dusseldorp, Elise Meulman, Jacqueline J. Res Synth Methods Research Articles In meta‐analytic studies, there are often multiple moderators available (eg, study characteristics). In such cases, traditional meta‐analysis methods often lack sufficient power to investigate interaction effects between moderators, especially high‐order interactions. To overcome this problem, meta‐CART was proposed: an approach that applies classification and regression trees (CART) to identify interactions, and then subgroup meta‐analysis to test the significance of moderator effects. The aim of this study is to improve meta‐CART upon two aspects: 1) to integrate the two steps of the approach into one and 2) to consistently take into account the fixed‐effect or random‐effects assumption in both the the interaction identification and testing process. For fixed effect meta‐CART, weights are applied, and subgroup analysis is adapted. For random effects meta‐CART, a new algorithm has been developed. The performance of the improved meta‐CART was investigated via an extensive simulation study on different types of moderator variables (ie, dichotomous, nominal, ordinal, and continuous variables). The simulation results revealed that the new method can achieve satisfactory performance (power greater than 0.80 and Type I error less than 0.05) if appropriate pruning rule is applied and the number of studies is large enough. The required minimum number of studies ranges from 40 to 120 depending on the complexity and strength of the interaction effects, the within‐study sample size, the type of moderators, and the residual heterogeneity. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019-01-09 2019-03 /pmc/articles/PMC6590644/ /pubmed/30511514 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1334 Text en © 2018 The Authors. Research Synthesis Methods Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Research Articles Li, Xinru Dusseldorp, Elise Meulman, Jacqueline J. A flexible approach to identify interaction effects between moderators in meta‐analysis |
title | A flexible approach to identify interaction effects between moderators in meta‐analysis |
title_full | A flexible approach to identify interaction effects between moderators in meta‐analysis |
title_fullStr | A flexible approach to identify interaction effects between moderators in meta‐analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | A flexible approach to identify interaction effects between moderators in meta‐analysis |
title_short | A flexible approach to identify interaction effects between moderators in meta‐analysis |
title_sort | flexible approach to identify interaction effects between moderators in meta‐analysis |
topic | Research Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6590644/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30511514 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1334 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT lixinru aflexibleapproachtoidentifyinteractioneffectsbetweenmoderatorsinmetaanalysis AT dusseldorpelise aflexibleapproachtoidentifyinteractioneffectsbetweenmoderatorsinmetaanalysis AT meulmanjacquelinej aflexibleapproachtoidentifyinteractioneffectsbetweenmoderatorsinmetaanalysis AT lixinru flexibleapproachtoidentifyinteractioneffectsbetweenmoderatorsinmetaanalysis AT dusseldorpelise flexibleapproachtoidentifyinteractioneffectsbetweenmoderatorsinmetaanalysis AT meulmanjacquelinej flexibleapproachtoidentifyinteractioneffectsbetweenmoderatorsinmetaanalysis |