Format

Send to

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2007 Jan 23;7:5.

Inclusion of zero total event trials in meta-analyses maintains analytic consistency and incorporates all available data.

Author information

1
Interdepartmental Division of Critical Care, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada. j.friedrich@utoronto.ca

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

Meta-analysis handles randomized trials with no outcome events in both treatment and control arms inconsistently, including them when risk difference (RD) is the effect measure but excluding them when relative risk (RR) or odds ratio (OR) are used. This study examined the influence of such trials on pooled treatment effects.

METHODS:

Analysis with and without zero total event trials of three illustrative published meta-analyses with a range of proportions of zero total event trials, treatment effects, and heterogeneity using inverse variance weighting and random effects that incorporates between-study heterogeneity.

RESULTS:

Including zero total event trials in meta-analyses moves the pooled estimate of treatment effect closer to nil, decreases its confidence interval and decreases between-study heterogeneity. For RR and OR, inclusion of such trials causes small changes, even when they comprise the large majority of included trials. For RD, the changes are more substantial, and in extreme cases can eliminate a statistically significant effect estimate.

CONCLUSION:

To include all relevant data regardless of effect measure chosen, reviewers should also include zero total event trials when calculating pooled estimates using OR and RR.

PMID:
17244367
PMCID:
PMC1783664
DOI:
10.1186/1471-2288-7-5
[Indexed for MEDLINE]
Free PMC Article
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments
How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Full text links

    Icon for BioMed Central Icon for PubMed Central
    Loading ...
    Support Center