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

Approaches to heterogeneity in meta-analysis.

D B Petitti1

  • 1Kaiser Permanente Southern California, Pasadena, California, USA. diana.b.petitti@kp.org

Statistics in Medicine
|December 18, 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

Mortality following development of breast cancer while using oestrogen or oestrogen plus progestin: a computer record-linkage study.

British journal of cancer·2005
Same author

Rehospitalisation for neonatal jaundice: risk factors and outcomes.

Paediatric and perinatal epidemiology·2001
Same author

Emergency contraception: knowledge and attitudes of health care providers in a health maintenance organization.

Women's health issues : official publication of the Jacobs Institute of Women's Health·2001
Same author

Salt and blood pressure. Conventional wisdom reconsidered.

Evaluation review·2001
Same author

Dietary sodium and blood pressure.

The New England journal of medicine·2001
Same author

Changes in providers' views and practices about emergency contraception with education.

Obstetrics and gynecology·2001
Same journal

Interpretable Bayesian Modeling for Multireader Multicase Studies: Addressing Overdispersion and Limited Sample Size in Diagnostic Enhancement Evaluation.

Statistics in medicine·2026
Same journal

Adaptive Sequential Multiple Hypotheses Testing for Concomitant Vaccine Safety Surveillance.

Statistics in medicine·2026
Same journal

Novel Distance Regression for Repeated Outcomes With Missing Data: Applications to Longitudinal and Crossover Studies of Microbiome Beta-Diversity.

Statistics in medicine·2026
Same journal

Optimal Weighted Tests for Replication Studies and the 'Two-Trials Rule' With Multiple Hypotheses.

Statistics in medicine·2026
Same journal

Identifiable Copula-Double-Cox Models: A Fully Parametric Framework for Dependent Right-Censored Survival Data.

Statistics in medicine·2026
Same journal

Moving From Individualized Risk-Based Prevention to Benefit-Based Prevention: Estimating Individualized Life-Years Gained From Prevention Services as a Basis for Eligibility.

Statistics in medicine·2026
See all related articles

This review found inconsistencies in statistical heterogeneity testing and reporting in reproductive health meta-analyses. Recommendations are provided for improved assessment and interpretation of heterogeneity in research.

Area of Science:

  • Reproductive Health
  • Medical Research Methodology
  • Biostatistics

Background:

  • Meta-analysis is a critical tool in synthesizing research findings.
  • Assessing statistical heterogeneity is crucial for interpreting meta-analysis results accurately.
  • Previous reviews have highlighted variability in meta-analytic practices.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To evaluate the conduct and reporting of statistical heterogeneity tests in reproductive health meta-analyses.
  • To identify common practices and potential deficiencies in handling heterogeneity.
  • To offer recommendations for enhancing the quality of meta-analysis in this field.

Main Methods:

  • Systematic review of meta-analyses published between January 1999 and March 2001.
  • Searched MEDLINE for studies self-identified or indexed as meta-analyses on reproductive health.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Assessed the performance and reporting of statistical heterogeneity tests and model selection.

    • Main Results:

    • Tests for statistical heterogeneity were not consistently performed, despite their recognized importance.
    • Reporting of heterogeneity test results was often incomplete.
    • Inconsistent significance levels (0.05 vs. 0.10) were used for heterogeneity tests without clear justification.
    • The rationale for choosing random or fixed effects models was frequently not stated.

    Conclusions:

    • There are notable shortcomings in the application and reporting of statistical heterogeneity in reproductive health meta-analyses.
    • Adherence to best practices in heterogeneity assessment and reporting needs improvement.
    • Recommendations are proposed for standardized approaches to assessing, reporting, and exploring heterogeneity.