Statements in which the resource exists as a subject.
PredicateObject
rdf:type
lifeskim:mentions
pubmed:issue
7
pubmed:dateCreated
1988-2-16
pubmed:abstractText
The replicate variability of meta-analyses of controlled clinical trials has been assessed as a measure of scientific precision. 46 of 91 known meta-analysis papers were divided into 20 cohorts of studies of the same therapies. Ten cohorts contained meta-analyses with different statistical conclusions; 14 contained differing clinical conclusions with a wider spread than the statistically differing studies. Possible causes of variability, such as different trials included, different policies regarding the inclusion of non-randomized and unpublished trials, and different statistical methodologies, were not obvious causes of differing conclusions. Further work in this area should include multivariate analyses in order to explore possible interactions in the factors accounting for the variability found in replicate meta-analyses.
pubmed:grant
pubmed:language
eng
pubmed:journal
pubmed:citationSubset
IM
pubmed:status
MEDLINE
pubmed:issn
0277-6715
pubmed:author
pubmed:issnType
Print
pubmed:volume
6
pubmed:owner
NLM
pubmed:authorsComplete
Y
pubmed:pagination
733-44
pubmed:dateRevised
2007-11-15
pubmed:meshHeading
pubmed:articleTitle
Meta-analysis of clinical trials as a scientific discipline. II: Replicate variability and comparison of studies that agree and disagree.
pubmed:affiliation
Clinical Trials Unit, Mount Sinai School of Medicine of CUNY, NY 10029.
pubmed:publicationType
Journal Article, Comparative Study, Research Support, U.S. Gov't, P.H.S., Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't