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

Meta-analysis of method comparison studies.

P R Williamson1, G A Lancaster, J V Craig

  • 1Department of Mathematical Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, U.K. prw@liv.ac.uk

Statistics in Medicine
|July 12, 2002
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

e-Consent in UK academic-led clinical trials: current practice, challenges and the need for more evidence.

Trials·2023
Same author

Using routinely recorded data in a UK RCT: a comparison to standard prospective data collection methods.

Trials·2021
Same author

Core outcome set for surgical trials in gastric cancer (GASTROS study): international patient and healthcare professional consensus.

The British journal of surgery·2021
Same author

Determining sample size for progression criteria for pragmatic pilot RCTs: the hypothesis test strikes back!

Pilot and feasibility studies·2021
Same author

Review of health economic models exploring and evaluating treatment and management of hospital-acquired pneumonia and ventilator-associated pneumonia.

The Journal of hospital infection·2020
Same author

A core outcome set for pre-eclampsia research: an international consensus development study.

BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology·2020
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 study introduces novel meta-analysis methods for comparing measurement techniques, addressing a gap in existing research. It provides tools to pool data, assess heterogeneity, and detect publication bias in comparative studies.

Area of Science:

  • Medical Statistics
  • Biostatistics
  • Health Research Methodology

Background:

  • Meta-analysis is established for randomized controlled trials.
  • No established methods exist for meta-analysis of method comparison studies.
  • Combining results from studies comparing measurement methods on the same subjects is needed.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To develop methods for meta-analysis of method comparison studies.
  • To estimate pooled mean difference and 95% limits of agreement.
  • To investigate heterogeneity and publication bias.

Main Methods:

  • Comparing standard methods for pooling k samples from a Normal population with pooling parameter estimates.
  • Proposing methods for heterogeneity investigation and random effects estimation.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Investigating publication bias by comparing published vs. unpublished study estimates.

    • Main Results:

    • The study proposes novel statistical methods for meta-analysis of method comparison studies.
    • Methods are presented for pooling mean differences and limits of agreement.
    • Techniques for assessing heterogeneity and publication bias are introduced.

    Conclusions:

    • The developed methods enable robust meta-analysis of comparative measurement studies.
    • These techniques can improve the synthesis of evidence from studies comparing diagnostic or measurement methods.
    • The approach is illustrated with an example of temperature measurement accuracy.