Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Valid inference in random effects meta-analysis.

D A Follmann1, M A Proschan

  • 1Office of Biostatistics Research, National Heart Lung and Blood Institute, Bethesda, Maryland 20892-7938, USA. follmann@helix.nih.gov

Biometrics
|April 21, 2001
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Baseline CD4+ T-cell counts predict HBV viral kinetics to adefovir treatment in lamivudine-resistant HBV-infected patients with or without HIV infection.

HIV clinical trials·2013
Same author

Cycling of gut mucosal CD4+ T cells decreases after prolonged anti-retroviral therapy and is associated with plasma LPS levels.

Mucosal immunology·2009
Same author

Treatment intensification does not reduce residual HIV-1 viremia in patients on highly active antiretroviral therapy.

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America·2009
Same author

Effects on blood lipids of a blood pressure-lowering diet: the Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension (DASH) Trial.

The American journal of clinical nutrition·2001
Same author

Use of summary measures to adjust for informative missingness in repeated measures data with random effects.

Biometrics·2001
Same author

Repeated probit regression when covariates are measured with error.

Biometrics·2001
Same journal

Fast penalized generalized estimating equations for large longitudinal functional datasets.

Biometrics·2026
Same journal

Causally-interpretable random-effects meta-analysis.

Biometrics·2026
Same journal

Statistical inference for mean function of partially observed functional time series.

Biometrics·2026
Same journal

Subgroup identification via Interaction Tree and Mixed Model for Repeated Measures with application to Alzheimer's disease.

Biometrics·2026
Same journal

Finite mixtures of linear quantile regressions with concomitant variables: a solution to endogeneity in longitudinal data modeling.

Biometrics·2026
Same journal

Discussion on "INTACT: a method for integration of longitudinal physical activity data from multiple sources" by Jingru Zhang, Erjia Cui, Hongzhe Li, and Haochang Shou.

Biometrics·2026
See all related articles

New methods improve random effects meta-analysis testing when few studies exist. Permutation and t-distribution approaches offer more accurate results than standard normal approximations for medical meta-analyses.

Area of Science:

  • Statistics
  • Biostatistics
  • Medical Research Methodology

Background:

  • Standard random effects meta-analysis inference uses normal distribution approximations.
  • These approximations are asymptotic on the number of studies (k) and can be inaccurate with few studies, common in medical meta-analyses.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To propose and evaluate alternative testing methods for random effects meta-analysis.
  • To address the limitations of normal distribution approximations in small-study meta-analyses.

Main Methods:

  • A group permutation method involving random switching of treatment and control group labels.
  • Two ad hoc procedures: using a t-reference distribution (k-1 degrees of freedom) and a simple t-statistic on reported treatment effects.

Related Experiment Videos

Main Results:

  • The permutation method theoretically controls the type I error rate in typical meta-analysis scenarios.
  • The study investigates the performance of these alternative methods compared to the standard approach.

Conclusions:

  • Permutation and ad hoc methods provide more reliable inference for random effects meta-analysis, especially when the number of studies is small.
  • These methods can improve the accuracy of statistical testing in medical meta-analyses with limited data.