Endocrinology and Metabolism

The Korean Endocrine Society (대한내분비학회)
권호 표지

Meta-analysis

메타분석

Lee, June-Young
이준영

  • Published : 20081200
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Keywords

References

  1. Nissen SE, Wolski K: Effect of rosiglitazone on the risk of myocardial infarction and death from cardiovascular causes. NEJM 356:2457-2471, 2007 https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa072761
  2. Psaty BM, Furberg CD:. Rosiglitazone and cardiovascular risk. NEJM 356:2522-2524, 2007 https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMe078099
  3. Psaty BM, Furberg CD: The record on rosiglitazone and the risk of myocardial infarction. NEJM 357:67-69, 2007 https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMe078116
  4. The RECORD study group: Rosiglitazone evaluated for cardiovascular outcomes-an interim analysis. NEJM 357:28-38, 2007 https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa073394
  5. Drazen JM, Morrissey S, Curfman GD: Rosiglitazone -continued uncertainty about safety. NEJM 357:63-64, 2007 https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMe078118
  6. Nathan DM: Rosiglitazone and cardiotoxicity-weighing the evidence. NEJM 357:64-66, 2007 https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMe078117
  7. Rosen CJ: The rosiglitazone story - Lessons from an FDA advisory committee meeting. NEJM 357:844-846, 2007 https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMp078167
  8. Letters to the editor: Rosiglitazone and cardiovascular risk. NEJM 357:930-940, 2007
  9. Letters to the editor: Rosiglitazone and the FDA. NEJM 357:1775-1777, 2007 https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMc076347
  10. The ACCORD study group: Effects of intensive glucose lowering in type 2 diabetes. NEJM 358:2545 -2559, 2008 https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa0802743
  11. The ADVANCE collaborative group: Intensive blood glucose control and vascular outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes. NEJM 358:2560-2572, 2008 https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa0802987
  12. Goldfine AB: Assessing the cardiovascular safety of diabetes therapies. NEJM 359:1092-1095, 2008 https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMp0805758
  13. Pearson K: Report on certain enteric fever inoculation statistics. BMJ 3:1243-1246, 1904
  14. Egger M, Davey Smith G: Meta-analysis: potentials and premise. BMJ 315:1371-1374, 1997 https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.315.7119.1371
  15. Lasagna L, Mosteller F, von Felsinger JM, Beecher HK: A study on the placebo response. Am J Med 16:770-779, 1954 https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9343(54)90441-6
  16. Glass GV: Primary, secondary and meta-analysis of research. Edu Res 5:3-8, 1976
  17. Cochrane AL: Effectiveness and efficiency: Random reflections on the health service. London: Nuffield Provincial Hospitals Trust, 1972
  18. Cochrane AL: 1931-1971: A critical review, with particular reference to the medical profession. In: Medicines for the year 2000. London: Office of Health Economics, 1-11, 1979
  19. Chalmers I, Sackett D, Silagy C, Maynard A, Chalmers TC: Non-random reflections on health services research. London: BMJ Publishing Group, 1997
  20. Sackett DL, Rosenberg WM, Gray JA, Haynes RB, Richardson WS: Evidence-based medicine: what is it and what it isn't. BMJ 312:71-72, 1996 https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.312.7023.71
  21. Lee JY: Medical Statistics at a Glance. Seoul, Epublic, 2007
  22. Sackett DL, Straus S, Richardson S, Rosenberg W, Haynes RB: Evidence-based medicine: how to practice and teach EBM. 2nd ed. Churchill -Livingston, London, 2000
  23. Greenhalgh T: Papers that summarise other papers (systematic reviews and meta-analyses). BMJ 315:672-675, 1997 https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.315.7109.672
  24. DerSimonian R, Laird NM: Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials 7:177-186, 1986 https://doi.org/10.1016/0197-2456(86)90046-2
  25. Egger M, Davey Smith G, Altman D: Systematic reviews in health care: Meta-analysis in context. London, BMJ Publishing Group, 2001
  26. L'Abbe KA, Detsky AS, O'Rourke K: Meta-analysis in clinical research. Ann Intern Med 107:224-233, 1987 https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-107-2-224
  27. Meade MO: Selecting and appraising studies for a systematic review. Ann Intern Med 127:531-537, 1997 https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-127-7-199710010-00005
  28. Higgins JPT, Green S: Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. version 5.0.0. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2008. Available from http://www.cochrane-handbook.org Accessed Nov 28, 2008
  29. Counseil C: Formulating questions and locating primary studies for inclusion in systematic reviews. Ann Intern Med 127:380-387, 1997 https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-127-5-199709010-00008
  30. Egger M, Davey Smith G, Phillips AN: Meta-analysis: principles and procedures. BMJ 315:1533-1537, 1997 https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.315.7121.1533
  31. Simes RJ: Confronting publication bias: a cohort design for meta-analysis. Stat Med 6:11-29, 1987 https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.4780060104
  32. Egger M, Davey Smith G, Schneider M, Minder C: Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. BMJ 315:629-634, 1997 https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.315.7109.629
  33. Greenland S: Invited commentary: a critical look at some popular meta-analytic methods. Am J Epidemiol 140:290-296, 1994 https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a117248
  34. Schulz KF, Chalmers I, Hayes RJ, Altman DG: Empirical evidence of bias: Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials. JAMA 273:408-412, 1995 https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.273.5.408
  35. Moher D, Pham B, Jones A, Jones A, Cook DJ, Jadad AR, Moher M, Tugwell P, Klassen TP: Does quality of reports of randomized trials affect estimates of intervention efficacy reported in meta-analyses? Lancet 352:609-613, 1998 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(98)01085-X
  36. Moher D, Jadad AR, Nichol G, Penman M, Tugwell P, Walsh S: Assessing the quality of randomized controlled trials: an annotated bibliography of scales and checklists. Control Clin Trials 16:62-73, 1995 https://doi.org/10.1016/0197-2456(94)00031-W
  37. Juni P, Witschi A, Bloch R, Egger M: The hazards of scoring the quality of clinical trials for meta-analysis. JAMA 282:1054-1060, 1999 https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.282.11.1054
  38. Moher D, Cook DJ, Jadad AR, Tugwell P, Moher M, Jones A, Pham B, Klassen TP: Assessing the quality of reports of randomised trials: implications for the conduct of meta-analyses. Health Technol Assess 3:1-98, 1999
  39. Chalmers TC, Smith H, Blackburn B, Silverman B, Schroeder B, Reitman D, Ambroz A: A method for assessing the quality of a randomized control trial. Control Clin Trials 2:31-49, 1981 https://doi.org/10.1016/0197-2456(81)90056-8
  40. Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carroll D, Jenkinson C, Reynolds DJM, Gavaghan, DJ, McQuay H: Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: Is blinding necessary? Control Clin Trials 17:1-12, 1996 https://doi.org/10.1016/0197-2456(95)00134-4
  41. Stewart LA, Clarke M: Practical methodology of meta-analysis (overviews) using updated individual patient data: Cochrane Working Group. Stat Med 14:2057-2079, 1995 https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.4780141902
  42. Cochrane Collaboration Individual Patient Data Meta -analysis Methods Group. http://www.ctu.mrc.ac.uk/cochrane/ipdmg/ Accessed Nov 28, 2008
  43. Hedges LV: Statistical Methodology in Meta-Analysis. Educational Testing Service, Princeton, 1982
  44. Sutton AJ, Abrams KR, Jones DR, Sheldon TA, Song F: Methods for meta-analysis in medical research. John Wiley and Sons, New York, 2000
  45. Fleiss JL: The statistical basis of meta-analysis. Stat Meth Med Res 2:121-145, 1993 https://doi.org/10.1177/096228029300200202
  46. Cochran WG: The combination of estimates from different experiments. Biometrics 10:101-129, 1954 https://doi.org/10.2307/3001666
  47. Higgins JPT, Thompson SG, Deeks J, Altman DG: Statistical heterogeneity in systematic reviews of clinical trials: a critical appraisal of guidelines and practice. J Hlth Serv Res Policy 7:51-61, 2002 https://doi.org/10.1258/1355819021927674
  48. Higgins JPT, Thompson SG, Deeks J, Altman DG: Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ 327:557-560, 2003 https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.327.7414.557
  49. Fleiss JL: Analysis of data from multiclinic trials. Control Clin Trials 7:267-275, 1986 https://doi.org/10.1016/0197-2456(86)90034-6
  50. Furberg CT, Morgan TM: Lessons from overviews of cardiovascular trials. Stat Med 6:295-303, 1987 https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.4780060316
  51. Oxman AD, Guyatt GH: A consumer's guide to subgroup analyses. Ann Intern Med 116:78-84, 1992 https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-116-1-78
  52. Schmid CH: Exploring heterogeneity in randomized trials via meta-analysis. Drug Info J 33:211-224, 1999 https://doi.org/10.1177/009286159903300124
  53. Glasziou PP, Sanders SL: Investigating causes of heterogeneity in systematic reviews. Stat Med 21:1503-1511, 2002 https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.1183
  54. Song F: Exploring heterogeneity in meta-analysis: is the L'Abbe plot useful? J Clin Epidemiol 52:725-730, 1999 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0895-4356(99)00066-9
  55. Galbraith RF: A note on the graphical presentation of estimated odds ratio from several clinical trials. Stat Med 7:889-894, 1988 https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.4780070807
  56. Thompson SG: Controversies in meta-analysis: the case of the trials of serum cholesterol reduction. Stat Meth Med Res 2:173-192, 1993 https://doi.org/10.1177/096228029300200205
  57. The QUOROM group: Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials: the QUOROM statement. Lancet 354:1896-1900, 1999 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(99)04149-5
  58. The MOOSE group: Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology. a proposal for reporting. JAMA 283:2008-2012, 2000 https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.283.15.2008
  59. Egger M, Davey Smith G: Bias in location and selection of studies. BMJ 316:61-66, 1998 https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.316.7124.61
  60. Song F, Eastwood AJ, Gilbody S, Duley L, Sutton AJ: Publication and related biases. Health Technol Assess 2004:1-105
  61. Shapiro S: Meta-analysis/Shmeta-analysis. Am J Epidemiol 140:771-778, 1994 https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a117324
  62. LeLorier J, Gregoire G, Benhaddad A, Lapierre J, Derderian F: Discrepancies between meta-analyses and subsequent large randomized, controlled trials. NEJM 337:536-542, 1997 https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJM199708213370806
  63. Rosenfeld RM, Post JC: Meta-analysis of antibiotics for the treatment of otitis media with effusion. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 106:378-386, 1992 https://doi.org/10.1177/019459989210600411
  64. Williams RL, Chalmers TC, Strange KC, Chalmers FT, Bowlin SJ: Use of antibiotics in preventing recurrent acute otitis media and in treating otitis media with effusion: a meta-analytic attempt to resolve the brouhaha. JAMA 270:1344-1351, 1993 https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.270.11.1344
  65. Kerlikowske K, Grady D, Rubin SM, Sandrick C, Ernster VL: Efficacy of screening mammography: a meta-analysis. JAMA 273:149-154, 1995 https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.273.2.149
  66. Smart CR, Hendrick RE, Rutledge JH, Smith RA: Benefit of mammography screening in women ages 40 to 49 years: current evidence from randomized controlled trials. Cancer 75:1619-1626, 1995 https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-0142(19950401)75:7<1619::AID-CNCR2820750711>3.0.CO;2-T
  67. Cook DJ, Mulrow CD, Haynes RB: Systematic reviews: synthesis of best evidence for clinical decisions. Ann Int Med 126;376-380, 1997 https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-126-5-199703010-00006
  68. Davey Smith G, Egger M: Meta-analysis: unresolved issues and future developments. BMJ 316:221-225, 1998 https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.316.7126.221