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
. 2012;7(7):e39471.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0039471. Epub 2012 Jul 25.

Evolution of heterogeneity (I2) estimates and their 95% confidence intervals in large meta-analyses

Kristian Thorlund  1 , Georgina Imberger, Bradley C Johnston, Michael Walsh, Tahany Awad, Lehana Thabane, Christian Gluud, P J Devereaux, Jørn Wetterslev
Affiliations

Evolution of heterogeneity (I2) estimates and their 95% confidence intervals in large meta-analyses

Kristian Thorlund et al. PLoS One. 2012.

Abstract

Background: Assessment of heterogeneity is essential in systematic reviews and meta-analyses of clinical trials. The most commonly used heterogeneity measure, I(2), provides an estimate of the proportion of variability in a meta-analysis that is explained by differences between the included trials rather than by sampling error. Recent studies have raised concerns about the reliability of I(2) estimates, due to their dependence on the precision of included trials and time-dependent biases. Authors have also advocated use of 95% confidence intervals (CIs) to express the uncertainty associated with I(2) estimates. However, no previous studies have explored how many trials and events are required to ensure stable and reliable I(2) estimates, or how 95% CIs perform as evidence accumulates.

Methodology/principal findings: To assess the stability and reliability of I(2) estimates and their 95% CIs, in relation to the cumulative number of trials and events in meta-analysis, we looked at 16 large Cochrane meta-analyses--each including a sufficient number of trials and events to reliably estimate I(2)--and monitored the I(2) estimates and their 95% CIs for each year of publication. In 10 of the 16 meta-analyses, the I(2) estimates fluctuated more than 40% over time. The median number of events and trials required before the cumulative I(2) estimates stayed within +/-20% of the final I(2) estimate was 467 and 11. No major fluctuations were observed after 500 events and 14 trials. The 95% confidence intervals provided good coverage over time.

Conclusions/significance: I(2) estimates need to be interpreted with caution when the meta-analysis only includes a limited number of events or trials. Confidence intervals for I(2) estimates provide good coverage as evidence accumulates, and are thus valuable for reflecting the uncertainty associated with estimating I(2).

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1. Presents the evolution of the cumulative I2 estimates and their associated 95% confidence intervals (CIs) over the accumulation of events in meta-analyses (1) to (8).
The cumulative I2 are represented by the dot-dashed line ( ), and their associated cumulative 95% CIs are represented by the dotted lines ( ).
Figure 2
Figure 2. Presents the evolution of the cumulative I2 estimates and their associated 95% confidence intervals (CIs) over the accumulation of events in meta-analyses (9) to (16).
The cumulative I2 are represented by the dot-dashed line ( ), and their associated cumulative 95% CIs are represented by the dotted lines ( ).
Figure 3
Figure 3. Presents the evolution of the cumulative I2 estimates and their associated 95% confidence intervals (CIs) over the accumulation of trials in meta-analyses (1) to (8).
The cumulative I2 are represented by the dot-dashed line ( ), and their associated cumulative 95% CIs are represented by the dotted lines ( ).
Figure 4
Figure 4. Presents the evolution of the cumulative I2 estimates and their associated 95% confidence intervals (CIs) over the accumulation of trials in meta-analyses (9) to (16).
The cumulative I2 are represented by the dot-dashed line ( ), and their associated cumulative 95% CIs are represented by the dotted lines ( ).
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Engels EA, Schmid CH, Terrin N, Olkin I, Lau J. Heterogeneity and statistical significance in meta-analysis: an empirical study of 125 meta-analyses. Statistics in Medicine. 2000;19:1707–1728. - PubMed
    1. Higgins JP, Thompson S. Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. Statistics in Medicine. 2002;21:1539–1558. - PubMed
    1. Higgins JP, Thompson S, Deeks J, Altman DG. Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. British Medical Journal. 2003;327:557–560. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Higgins JP, Green S. Cochrane Handbook for systematic reviews of interventions, version 5.0.0. John Wiley & Sons 2009
    1. Lau J, Ioaniddis JP, Schmid CH. Summing up evidence: one answer is not always enough. Lancet. 1998;351:123–127. - PubMed