[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address 34.204.176.189. Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
[Skip to Content Landing]
Views 517
Citations 0
Comment & Response
June 11, 2019

Meta-analysis of Aspirin for Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Events—Reply

Author Affiliations
  • 1Faculty of Life Sciences and Medicine, King’s College London, London, United Kingdom
JAMA. 2019;321(22):2244-2245. doi:10.1001/jama.2019.4017

In Reply Mr Syn and Mr Wee questioned the rationale for excluding studies from our meta-analysis1 based on numbers of participants. Of 1385 articles identified in the systematic search, no studies were excluded based on the number of participants enrolled. However, there are several reasons for excluding small studies. Small studies are often of poorer methodological quality and have a higher risk of bias,2 and including them can exaggerate treatment effects and lead to misleading conclusions.3 Furthermore, small studies have negligible contributions when 2 or more adequately powered studies are included in a meta-analysis.3 These factors may justify the exclusion of small and underpowered studies from meta-analyses in which adequately powered studies already exist.3

×