Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis.

Stat Med 2002 Jun;21(11):1539-58

MRC Biostatistics Unit, Institute of Public Health, Robinson Way, Cambridge CB2 2SR, UK.

The extent of heterogeneity in a meta-analysis partly determines the difficulty in drawing overall conclusions. This extent may be measured by estimating a between-study variance, but interpretation is then specific to a particular treatment effect metric. A test for the existence of heterogeneity exists, but depends on the number of studies in the meta-analysis. We develop measures of the impact of heterogeneity on a meta-analysis, from mathematical criteria, that are independent of the number of studies and the treatment effect metric. We derive and propose three suitable statistics: H is the square root of the chi2 heterogeneity statistic divided by its degrees of freedom; R is the ratio of the standard error of the underlying mean from a random effects meta-analysis to the standard error of a fixed effect meta-analytic estimate, and I2 is a transformation of (H) that describes the proportion of total variation in study estimates that is due to heterogeneity. We discuss interpretation, interval estimates and other properties of these measures and examine them in five example data sets showing different amounts of heterogeneity. We conclude that H and I2, which can usually be calculated for published meta-analyses, are particularly useful summaries of the impact of heterogeneity. One or both should be presented in published meta-analyses in preference to the test for heterogeneity.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/sim.1186DOI Listing
June 2002
8 Reads

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

heterogeneity meta-analysis
12
treatment metric
8
published meta-analyses
8
number studies
8
heterogeneity
8
standard error
8
impact heterogeneity
8
meta-analysis
5
root chi2
4
square root
4
data sets
4
examine example
4
chi2 heterogeneity
4
heterogeneity statistic
4
example data
4
statistic divided
4
statistics square
4
propose three
4
studies treatment
4
metric derive
4

References

(Supplied by CrossRef)

DerSimonian et al.
Controlled Clinical Trials 1986

Cochran et al.
Biometrics 1954

Whitehead et al.
Statistics in Medicine 1991

Hardy et al.
Statistics in Medicine 1998

Cochrane Injuries Group Albumin et al.
British Medical Journal 1998

Beale et al.
British Medical Journal 1998

Sarcoma Meta-analysis Collaboration et al.
Lancet 1997

Pagliaro et al.
Annals of Internal Medicine 1992

Fioravanti et al.
2000

Parker et al.
2000

Yusuf et al.
Progress in Cardiovascular Diseases 1985

Similar Publications