Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2008;17(1):55-61.
doi: 10.1002/mpr.240.

Meta-analyses of the incidence and prevalence of schizophrenia: conceptual and methodological issues

Affiliations
Review

Meta-analyses of the incidence and prevalence of schizophrenia: conceptual and methodological issues

Sukanta Saha et al. Int J Methods Psychiatr Res. 2008.

Abstract

While meta-analytic techniques are routine in the synthesis of data from randomized controlled trials, there are no clear guidelines on how best to summarize frequency data such as incidence and prevalence estimates. Based on data from two recent systematic reviews of the incidence and prevalence of schizophrenia, this paper explores some of the conceptual and methodological issues related to the meta-analyses of frequency estimates in epidemiology. Because variations in the incidence and prevalence of disorders such as schizophrenia can be informative, there is a case against collapsing data into one pooled estimate. Variations in frequency estimates can be displayed graphically, or summarized with quantiles around measures of central tendency. If pooled estimated are of interest, then researchers need to be aware that studies based on large samples will leverage greater weight on the pooled value. Based on systematic reviews of the incidence and prevalence of schizophrenia, we explore if these and related issues are of practical concern. When used with appropriate caution, meta-analysis can complement the synthesis of frequency data in epidemiology; however, researchers interested in variation should not rely on meta-analysis alone.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Aleman A, Kahn RS, Selten JP. Sex differences in the risk of schizophrenia: evidence from meta‐analysis. Arch Gen Psychiatry 2003; 60: 565–71. DOI: 10.1001/archpsyc.60.6.565 - PubMed
    1. Berkey CS, Hoaglin DC, Mosteller F, Colditz GA. A random‐effects regression model for meta‐analysis. Stat Med 1995; 14: 395–411. - PubMed
    1. Berlin JA. Invited commentary: benefits of heterogeity in meta‐analysis of data from epidemiologic studies. Am J Epidemiol 1995; 142: 383–7. - PubMed
    1. Cantor‐Graae E, Selten JP. Schizophrenia and migration: a meta‐analysis and review. Am J Psychiatry 2005; 162: 12–24. DOI: 10.1176/appi.ajp.162.1.12 - PubMed
    1. Clarke MJ, Stewart LA. Obtaining data from randomised controlled trials: how much do we need for reliable and informative meta‐analyses? Br Med J 1994; 309: 1007–10. - PMC - PubMed