Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Problems Caused by Heterogeneity in Meta-Analysis: A Case Study of Acupuncture Trials

Problems Caused by Heterogeneity in Meta-Analysis: A Case Study of Acupuncture Trials ObjectivesTo illustrate the pitfalls of using meta-analysis to combine estimates of effect in trials that are highly varied and have a high potential for bias.MethodsWe used a random-effects meta-analysis to pool the results of 51 sham-controlled acupuncture trials of chronic pain published in English before 2008 and explored the heterogeneity using meta-regression. We repeated the process on a subset of these trials that used a visually credible non-penetrating sham device as control (N = 12).ResultsIn both analyses there were high levels of heterogeneity and many studies were at risk from potential bias. The heterogeneity was not explained by meta-regression.ConclusionsTrials of interventions that have high potential for bias, such as many in the acupuncture literature, do not meet the assumptions of the statistical procedure that underlie random-effects meta-analysis. Even in the absence of bias, heterogeneity in meta-analyses is not accounted for by the CIs around the pooled estimate. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Acupuncture in Medicine SAGE

Problems Caused by Heterogeneity in Meta-Analysis: A Case Study of Acupuncture Trials

Loading next page...
 
/lp/sage/problems-caused-by-heterogeneity-in-meta-analysis-a-case-study-of-Hc9uu2gmMp

References (30)

Publisher
SAGE
Copyright
© 2014 British Medical Acupuncutre Society
ISSN
0964-5284
eISSN
1759-9873
DOI
10.1136/acupmed-2013-010364
pmid
24140758
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

ObjectivesTo illustrate the pitfalls of using meta-analysis to combine estimates of effect in trials that are highly varied and have a high potential for bias.MethodsWe used a random-effects meta-analysis to pool the results of 51 sham-controlled acupuncture trials of chronic pain published in English before 2008 and explored the heterogeneity using meta-regression. We repeated the process on a subset of these trials that used a visually credible non-penetrating sham device as control (N = 12).ResultsIn both analyses there were high levels of heterogeneity and many studies were at risk from potential bias. The heterogeneity was not explained by meta-regression.ConclusionsTrials of interventions that have high potential for bias, such as many in the acupuncture literature, do not meet the assumptions of the statistical procedure that underlie random-effects meta-analysis. Even in the absence of bias, heterogeneity in meta-analyses is not accounted for by the CIs around the pooled estimate.

Journal

Acupuncture in MedicineSAGE

Published: Feb 1, 2014

There are no references for this article.