Apparently conclusive meta-analyses may be inconclusive—Trial sequential analysis adjustment of random error risk due to repetitive testing of accumulating data in apparently conclusive neonatal meta-analyses

Clicks: 1
ID: 302280
2008
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal

Ranked #115 of 133 articles by views in International Journal of Epidemiology

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 133 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
Background Random error may cause misleading evidence in meta-analyses. The required number of participants in a meta-analysis (i.e. information size) should be at least as large as an adequately powered single trial. Trial sequential analysis (TSA) may reduce risk of random errors due to repetitive testing of accumulating data by evaluating meta-analyses not reaching the information size with monitoring boundaries. This is analogous to sequential monitoring boundaries in a single trial. Methods We selected apparently conclusive (P ≤ 0.05) Cochrane neonatal meta-analyses. We applied heterogeneity-adjusted and unadjusted TSA on these meta-analyses by calculating the information size, the monitoring boundaries, and the cumulative Z-statistic after each trial. We identified the proportion of meta-analyses that did not reach the required information size and the proportion of these meta-analyses in which the Z-curve did not cross the monitoring boundaries. Results Of 54 apparently conclusive meta-analyses, 39 (72%) did not reach the heterogeneity-adjusted information size required to accept or reject an intervention effect of 25% relative risk reduction. Of these 39, 19 meta-analyses (49%) were considered inconclusive, because the cumulative Z-curve did not cross the monitoring boundaries. The median number of participants required to reach the required information size was 1591 (range, 339–6149). TSA without heterogeneity adjustment largely confirmed these results. Conclusions Many apparently conclusive Cochrane neonatal meta-analyses may become inconclusive when the statistical analyses take into account the risk of random error due to repetitive testing.
Reference Key
openalex_W2138188443 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Jesper Brok, Kristian Thorlund, Jørn Wetterslev, Christian Gluud
Journal International Journal of Epidemiology
Year 2008
DOI
10.1093/ije/dyn188
URL
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.