To the Editor Repeated clinical trials on a single medical intervention are never exact replications because patients differ and there are usually some variations in the intervention and outcome measurements. Such variations can lead to inconsistent results between studies on the same intervention.
Drs Serghiou and Goodman1 proposed random-effects meta-analysis as a solution to summarize inconsistent results. However, a long-term concern in meta-analysis has been the apples-and-oranges comparison problem when studies that are too different are combined into a single estimate of effect. Random-effects meta-analysis can exacerbate this problem.
Hemilä H. Random-Effects Assumption in Meta-analyses. JAMA. 2019;322(1):81. doi:10.1001/jama.2019.5439
Coronavirus Resource Center
Customize your JAMA Network experience by selecting one or more topics from the list below.
Create a personal account or sign in to: