Sensitivity subgroup analysis based on single-center vs. multi-center trial status when interpreting meta-analyses pooled estimates: the logical way forward
- PMID: 26597972
- DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2015.08.027
Sensitivity subgroup analysis based on single-center vs. multi-center trial status when interpreting meta-analyses pooled estimates: the logical way forward
Abstract
Objectives: Prior studies regarding whether single-center trial estimates are larger than multi-center are equivocal. We examined the extent to which single-center trials yield systematically larger effects than multi-center trials.
Study design and setting: We searched the 119 core clinical journals and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for meta-analyses (MAs) of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published during 2012. In this meta-epidemiologic study, for binary variables, we computed the pooled ratio of ORs (RORs), and for continuous outcomes mean difference in standardized mean differences (SMDs), we conducted weighted random-effects meta-regression and random-effects MA modeling. Our primary analyses were restricted to MAs that included at least five RCTs and in which at least 25% of the studies used each of single trial center (SC) and more trial center (MC) designs.
Results: We identified 81 MAs for the odds ratio (OR) and 43 for the SMD outcome measures. Based on our analytic plan, our primary analysis (core) is based on 25 MAs/241 RCTs (binary outcome) and 18 MAs/173 RCTs (continuous outcome). Based on the core analysis, we found no difference in magnitude of effect between SC and MC for binary outcomes [RORs: 1.02; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.83, 1.24; I(2) 20.2%]. Effect sizes were systematically larger for SC than MC for the continuous outcome measure (mean difference in SMDs: -0.13; 95% CI: -0.21, -0.05; I(2) 0%).
Conclusions: Our results do not support prior findings of larger effects in SC than MC trials addressing binary outcomes but show a very similar small increase in effect in SC than MC trials addressing continuous outcomes. Authors of systematic reviews would be wise to include all trials irrespective of SC vs. MC design and address SC vs. MC status as a possible explanation of heterogeneity (and consider sensitivity analyses).
Keywords: Heterogeneity; Mean difference in SMD; Meta-analyses; Metabias; Multi-center; Ratio of odds ratio; Single center.
Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Similar articles
-
Intervention effect estimates in cluster randomized versus individually randomized trials: a meta-epidemiological study.Int J Epidemiol. 2019 Apr 1;48(2):609-619. doi: 10.1093/ije/dyy229. Int J Epidemiol. 2019. PMID: 30418549 Free PMC article.
-
Single-center trials show larger treatment effects than multicenter trials: evidence from a meta-epidemiologic study.Ann Intern Med. 2011 Jul 5;155(1):39-51. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-155-1-201107050-00006. Ann Intern Med. 2011. PMID: 21727292
-
Comparison of nuisance parameters in pediatric versus adult randomized trials: a meta-epidemiologic empirical evaluation.BMC Med Res Methodol. 2018 Jan 10;18(1):7. doi: 10.1186/s12874-017-0456-8. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2018. PMID: 29321002 Free PMC article.
-
Combining follow-up and change data is valid in meta-analyses of continuous outcomes: a meta-epidemiological study.J Clin Epidemiol. 2013 Aug;66(8):847-55. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2013.03.009. Epub 2013 Jun 6. J Clin Epidemiol. 2013. PMID: 23747228 Review.
-
Risk of bias and magnitude of effect in orthodontic randomized controlled trials: a meta-epidemiological review.Eur J Orthod. 2016 Jun;38(3):308-12. doi: 10.1093/ejo/cjv049. Epub 2015 Jul 14. Eur J Orthod. 2016. PMID: 26174770 Free PMC article. Review.
Cited by
-
The safety and effectiveness of heated humidified high-flow nasal cannula as an initial ventilation method in the treatment of neonatal respiratory distress syndrome: A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis.Medicine (Baltimore). 2020 Nov 13;99(46):e23243. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000023243. Medicine (Baltimore). 2020. PMID: 33181713 Free PMC article.
-
The effect of auricular therapy on blood pressure: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Eur J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2020 Jan;19(1):20-30. doi: 10.1177/1474515119876778. Epub 2019 Oct 4. Eur J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2020. PMID: 31583887 Free PMC article.
-
SF3B1 mutation is a prognostic factor in chronic lymphocytic leukemia: a meta-analysis.Oncotarget. 2017 Jul 22;8(41):69916-69923. doi: 10.18632/oncotarget.19455. eCollection 2017 Sep 19. Oncotarget. 2017. PMID: 29050251 Free PMC article.
-
Genetic association of BIN1 and GAB2 in Alzheimer's disease: A meta-analysis and systematic review.Geriatr Gerontol Int. 2021 Feb;21(2):185-191. doi: 10.1111/ggi.14109. Epub 2020 Dec 16. Geriatr Gerontol Int. 2021. PMID: 33331110 Free PMC article.
-
Intervention effect estimates in cluster randomized versus individually randomized trials: a meta-epidemiological study.Int J Epidemiol. 2019 Apr 1;48(2):609-619. doi: 10.1093/ije/dyy229. Int J Epidemiol. 2019. PMID: 30418549 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources