Reevaluation of Statistically Significant Meta-Analyses in Advanced Cancer Patients Using the Hartung-Knapp Method and Prediction Intervals--A Methodological Study

Autor/inn/en	Siemens, Waldemar; Meerpohl, Joerg J.; Rohe, Miriam S.; Buroh, Sabine; Schwarzer, Guido; Becker, Gerhild
Titel	Reevaluation of Statistically Significant Meta-Analyses in Advanced Cancer Patients Using the Hartung-Knapp Method and Prediction Intervals--A Methodological Study
Quelle	In: Research Synthesis Methods, 13 (2022) 3, S.330-341 (12 Seiten)Infoseite zur Zeitschrift PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Zusatzinformation	ORCID (Siemens, Waldemar) ORCID (Meerpohl, Joerg J.) ORCID (Buroh, Sabine) ORCID (Schwarzer, Guido) ORCID (Becker, Gerhild)
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	1759-2879
DOI	10.1002/jrsm.1543
Schlagwörter	Cancer; Meta Analysis; Medical Research; Patients; Randomized Controlled Trials; Prediction; Statistical Significance; Intervals + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Carcinoma; Karzinom; Krebs (med); Krebserkrankung; Meta-analysis; Metaanalyse; Patient; Vorhersage
Abstract	Using the Hartung-Knapp method and 95% prediction intervals (PIs) in random-effects meta-analyses is recommended by experts but rarely applied. Therefore, we aimed to reevaluate statistically significant meta-analyses using the Hartung-Knapp method and 95% PIs. In this methodological study, three databases were searched from January 2010 to July 2019. We included systematic reviews reporting a statistically significant meta-analysis of at least four randomized controlled trials in advanced cancer patients using either a fixed-effect or random-effects model. We investigated the impact of switching from fixed-effect to random-effects meta-analysis and of using the recommended Hartung-Knapp method in random-effects meta-analyses. Furthermore, we calculated 95% PIs for all included meta-analyses. We identified 6234 hits, of which 261 statistically significant meta-analyses were included. Our recalculations of these 261 meta-analyses produced statistically significant results in 132 of 138 fixed-effect and 114 of 123 random-effects meta-analyses. When switching to a random-effects model, 19 of 132 fixed-effect meta-analyses (14.4%) were no longer statistically significant. Using the Hartung-Knapp method in random-effects meta-analyses resulted in 34 of 114 nonsignificant meta-analyses (29.8%). In the full sample (N = 261), the "null effect" was included by the 95% PI in 195 (74.7%) and the "opposite effect" (e.g., hazard ratio 0.5, opposite effect 2) in 98 meta-analyses (37.5%). Using the Hartung-Knapp method and PIs substantially influenced the interpretation of many published, statistically significant meta-analyses. We strongly encourage researchers to check if using the Hartung-Knapp method and reporting 95% PIs is appropriate in random-effects meta-analyses. (As Provided).
Anmerkungen	Wiley. Available from: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030. Tel: 800-835-6770; e-mail: cs-journals@wiley.com; Web site: https://www.wiley.com/en-us
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2024/1/01