[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address 54.166.74.94. Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
[Skip to Content Landing]
Views 545
Citations 0
Comment & Response
December 3, 2014

Assessment of Heterogeneity in Meta-analyses—Reply

Author Affiliations
  • 1Centre de Recherche Epidémiologie et Statistique, Paris, France
  • 2Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, New York
JAMA. 2014;312(21):2287. doi:10.1001/jama.2014.14349

In Reply Dr Hoaglin raises several points regarding the statistical methods used in our study. However, his concerns are general criticisms of usual statistical methods in meta-analyses and do not directly address our primary objective—assessing the association between analytic strategy and estimates of treatment outcomes—nor do they provide any counteracting scientific interpretation of our message.

Hoaglin comments on 3 choices for conducting meta-analyses: the use of the DerSimonian-Laird estimator of the between-trial variance, the use of a continuity correction to deal with zero-cell trials, and the use of the Q statistic. Because these choices are the same for all analytic strategies we compared, it is unlikely that they explain the differences observed between these analytic strategies or bias our conclusions in any way.

First Page Preview View Large
First page PDF preview
First page PDF preview
×