Cargando…

One‐stage random effects meta‐analysis using linear mixed models for aggregate continuous outcome data

The vast majority of meta‐analyses uses summary/aggregate data retrieved from published studies in contrast to meta‐analysis of individual participant data (IPD). When the outcome is continuous and IPD are available, linear mixed modelling methods can be employed in a one‐stage approach. This allows...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Papadimitropoulou, Katerina, Stijnen, Theo, Dekkers, Olaf M., le Cessie, Saskia
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/PMC6767371/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30523676
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1331
_version_ 1783454902434922496
author Papadimitropoulou, Katerina
Stijnen, Theo
Dekkers, Olaf M.
le Cessie, Saskia
author_facet Papadimitropoulou, Katerina
Stijnen, Theo
Dekkers, Olaf M.
le Cessie, Saskia
author_sort Papadimitropoulou, Katerina
collection PubMed
description The vast majority of meta‐analyses uses summary/aggregate data retrieved from published studies in contrast to meta‐analysis of individual participant data (IPD). When the outcome is continuous and IPD are available, linear mixed modelling methods can be employed in a one‐stage approach. This allows for flexible modelling of within‐study variability and between‐study effects and accounts for the uncertainty in the estimates of between‐study and within‐study residual variances. However, IPD are seldom available. For the normal outcome case, we present a method to generate pseudo IPD from aggregate data using group mean, standard deviation, and sample sizes within each study, ie, the sufficient statistics. Analyzing the pseudo IPD with likelihood‐based methods yields identical results as the analysis of the unknown true IPD. The advantage of this method is that we can employ the mixed modelling framework, implemented in many statistical software packages, and explore modelling options suitable for IPD, such as fixed study‐specific intercepts and fixed treatment effect model, fixed study‐specific intercepts and random treatment effects, and both random study and treatment effects and different options to model the within‐study residual variance. This allows choosing the most realistic (or potentially complex) residual variance structures across studies, instead of using an overly simple structure. We demonstrate these methods in two empirical datasets in Alzheimer disease, where an extensive model, assuming all within‐study variances to be free, fitted considerably better. In simulations, the pseudo IPD approach showed adequate coverage probability, because it accounted for small sample effects.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6767371
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-67673712019-10-03 One‐stage random effects meta‐analysis using linear mixed models for aggregate continuous outcome data Papadimitropoulou, Katerina Stijnen, Theo Dekkers, Olaf M. le Cessie, Saskia Res Synth Methods Research Articles The vast majority of meta‐analyses uses summary/aggregate data retrieved from published studies in contrast to meta‐analysis of individual participant data (IPD). When the outcome is continuous and IPD are available, linear mixed modelling methods can be employed in a one‐stage approach. This allows for flexible modelling of within‐study variability and between‐study effects and accounts for the uncertainty in the estimates of between‐study and within‐study residual variances. However, IPD are seldom available. For the normal outcome case, we present a method to generate pseudo IPD from aggregate data using group mean, standard deviation, and sample sizes within each study, ie, the sufficient statistics. Analyzing the pseudo IPD with likelihood‐based methods yields identical results as the analysis of the unknown true IPD. The advantage of this method is that we can employ the mixed modelling framework, implemented in many statistical software packages, and explore modelling options suitable for IPD, such as fixed study‐specific intercepts and fixed treatment effect model, fixed study‐specific intercepts and random treatment effects, and both random study and treatment effects and different options to model the within‐study residual variance. This allows choosing the most realistic (or potentially complex) residual variance structures across studies, instead of using an overly simple structure. We demonstrate these methods in two empirical datasets in Alzheimer disease, where an extensive model, assuming all within‐study variances to be free, fitted considerably better. In simulations, the pseudo IPD approach showed adequate coverage probability, because it accounted for small sample effects. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019-01-08 2019-09 /pmc/articles/PMC6767371/ /pubmed/30523676 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1331 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
Papadimitropoulou, Katerina
Stijnen, Theo
Dekkers, Olaf M.
le Cessie, Saskia
One‐stage random effects meta‐analysis using linear mixed models for aggregate continuous outcome data
title One‐stage random effects meta‐analysis using linear mixed models for aggregate continuous outcome data
title_full One‐stage random effects meta‐analysis using linear mixed models for aggregate continuous outcome data
title_fullStr One‐stage random effects meta‐analysis using linear mixed models for aggregate continuous outcome data
title_full_unstemmed One‐stage random effects meta‐analysis using linear mixed models for aggregate continuous outcome data
title_short One‐stage random effects meta‐analysis using linear mixed models for aggregate continuous outcome data
title_sort one‐stage random effects meta‐analysis using linear mixed models for aggregate continuous outcome data
topic Research Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6767371/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30523676
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1331
work_keys_str_mv AT papadimitropouloukaterina onestagerandomeffectsmetaanalysisusinglinearmixedmodelsforaggregatecontinuousoutcomedata
AT stijnentheo onestagerandomeffectsmetaanalysisusinglinearmixedmodelsforaggregatecontinuousoutcomedata
AT dekkersolafm onestagerandomeffectsmetaanalysisusinglinearmixedmodelsforaggregatecontinuousoutcomedata
AT lecessiesaskia onestagerandomeffectsmetaanalysisusinglinearmixedmodelsforaggregatecontinuousoutcomedata