-
- Kristian Thorlund, P J Devereaux, Jørn Wetterslev, Gordon Guyatt, John P A Ioannidis, Lehana Thabane, Lise-Lotte Gluud, Bodil Als-Nielsen, and Christian Gluud.
- Copenhagen Trial Unit, Center for Clinical Intervention Research, Copenhagen University Hospital, Department 3344, Blegdamsvej 9, DK-2100 Copenhagen, Denmark.
- Int J Epidemiol. 2009 Feb 1; 38 (1): 276-86.
BackgroundResults from apparently conclusive meta-analyses may be false. A limited number of events from a few small trials and the associated random error may be under-recognized sources of spurious findings. The information size (IS, i.e. number of participants) required for a reliable and conclusive meta-analysis should be no less rigorous than the sample size of a single, optimally powered randomized clinical trial. If a meta-analysis is conducted before a sufficient IS is reached, it should be evaluated in a manner that accounts for the increased risk that the result might represent a chance finding (i.e. applying trial sequential monitoring boundaries).MethodsWe analysed 33 meta-analyses with a sufficient IS to detect a treatment effect of 15% relative risk reduction (RRR). We successively monitored the results of the meta-analyses by generating interim cumulative meta-analyses after each included trial and evaluated their results using a conventional statistical criterion (alpha = 0.05) and two-sided Lan-DeMets monitoring boundaries. We examined the proportion of false positive results and important inaccuracies in estimates of treatment effects that resulted from the two approaches.ResultsUsing the random-effects model and final data, 12 of the meta-analyses yielded P > alpha = 0.05, and 21 yielded P = alpha = 0.05. False positive interim results were observed in 3 out of 12 meta-analyses with P > alpha = 0.05. The monitoring boundaries eliminated all false positives. Important inaccuracies in estimates were observed in 6 out of 21 meta-analyses using the conventional P = alpha = 0.05 and 0 out of 21 using the monitoring boundaries.ConclusionsEvaluating statistical inference with trial sequential monitoring boundaries when meta-analyses fall short of a required IS may reduce the risk of false positive results and important inaccurate effect estimates.
Notes
Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
- Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as
*italics*
,_underline_
or**bold**
. - Superscript can be denoted by
<sup>text</sup>
and subscript<sub>text</sub>
. - Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines
1. 2. 3.
, hyphens-
or asterisks*
. - Links can be included with:
[my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
- Images can be included with:
![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
- For footnotes use
[^1](This is a footnote.)
inline. - Or use an inline reference
[^1]
to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document[^1]: This is a long footnote.
.