The DOI matches its Crossref record; 53 of the 54 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Association Between Analytic Strategy and Estimates of Treatment Outcomes in Meta-analyses
Abstract
IMPORTANCE: A persistent dilemma when performing meta-analyses is whether all available trials should be included in the meta-analysis. OBJECTIVES: To compare treatment outcomes estimated by meta-analysis of all trials and several alternative analytic strategies: single most precise trial (ie, trial with the narrowest confidence interval), meta-analysis restricted to the 25% largest trials, limit meta-analysis (a meta-analysis model adjusted for small-study effect), and meta-analysis restricted to trials at low overall risk of bias. DATA SOURCES: One hundred sixty-three meta-analyses published between 2008 and 2010 in high-impact-factor journals and between 2011 and 2013 in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews: 92 (705 randomized clinical trials [RCTs]) with subjective outcomes and 71 (535 RCTs) with objective outcomes. DATA SYNTHESIS: For each meta-analysis, the difference in treatment outcomes between meta-analysis of all trials and each alternative strategy, expressed as a ratio of odds ratios (ROR), was assessed considering the dependency between strategies. A difference greater than 30% was considered substantial. RORs were combined by random-effects meta-analysis models to obtain an average difference across the sample. An ROR greater than 1 indicates larger treatment outcomes with meta-analysis of all trials. Subjective and objective outcomes were analyzed separately. RESULTS: Treatment outcomes were larger in the meta-analysis of all trials than in the single most precise trial (combined ROR, 1.13 [95% CI, 1.07-1.19]) for subjective outcomes and 1.03 (95% CI, 1.01-1.05) for objective outcomes). The difference in treatment outcomes between these strategies was substantial in 47 of 92 (51%) meta-analyses of subjective outcomes (meta-analysis of all trials showing larger outcomes in 40/47) and in 28 of 71 (39%) meta-analyses of objective outcomes (meta-analysis of all trials showing larger outcomes in 21/28). The combined ROR for subjective and objective outcomes was, respectively, 1.08 (95% CI, 1.04-1.13) and 1.03 (95% CI, 1.00-1.06) when comparing meta-analysis of all trials and meta-analysis of the 25% largest trials, 1.17 (95% CI, 1.11-1.22) and 1.13 (95% CI, 0.82-1.55) when comparing meta-analysis of all trials and limit meta-analysis, and 0.94 (95% CI, 0.86-1.04) and 1.03 (95% CI, 1.00-1.06) when comparing meta-analysis of all trials and meta-analysis restricted to trials at low risk of bias. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Estimation of treatment outcomes in meta-analyses differs depending on the strategy used. This instability in findings can result in major alterations in the conclusions derived from the analysis and underlines the need for systematic sensitivity analyses.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“The persistent evidence of small study effects, as well as the significant heterogeneity, y casts doubts over the reliability of the large effects observed for anxiety25,37,38.”
From The effectiveness of virtual reality based interventions for symptoms of anxiety and depression: A meta-analysis (2018) · cites this paper as [37]
In the citing paper
“Sensitivity analyses were performed by excluding small-size studies (< 25th percentile) [32] and excluding primary studies having a high risk of bias rated by the Cochrane’s risk of bias 2 tool (RoB 2) for RCTs from the identified associations [19–21, 33].”
From Effects of ketogenic diet on health outcomes: an umbrella review of meta-analyses of randomized clinical trials (2023) · cites this paper as [32]
Citations
Cites
The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials
Higgins, J. P. T., Altman, D. G., Gotzsche, P. C., Juni, P., Moher, D., Oxman, A. D., Savovic, J., Schulz, K. F., Weeks, L., Sterne, J. A. C., et al. (2011) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.d5928 · Cited by 33,817
Self-citationSterne, J. A. C., Sutton, A. J., Ioannidis, J. P. A., Terrin, N., Jones, D. R., Lau, J., Carpenter, J., Rucker, G., Harbord, R. M., Schmid, C. H., et al. (2011) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.d4002 · Cited by 7,709
Self-citationSchulz (1995) · doi:10.1001/jama.1995.03520290060030 · Cited by 5,634
Why Most Published Research Findings Are False
Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2005) · CHANCE · doi:10.1080/09332480.2005.10722754 · Cited by 4,702
Moher, D., Pham, B., Jones, A., Cook, D. J., Jadad, A. R., Moher, M., Tugwell, P., & Klassen, T. P. (1998) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(98)01085-x · Cited by 3,560
Assessing the quality of controlled clinical trials
Jüni, P., Altman, D. G., & Egger, M. (2001) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.323.7303.42 · Cited by 3,309
Self-citationWood, L., Egger, M., Gluud, L. L., Schulz, K. F., Jüni, P., Altman, D. G., Gluud, C., Martin, R. M., Wood, A. J. G., & Sterne, J. A. C. (2008) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.39465.451748.ad · Cited by 2,538
Self-citationPublication and related bias in meta-analysis
Sterne, J. A. C., Gavaghan, D., & Egger, M. (2000) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/s0895-4356(00)00242-0 · Cited by 2,282
Gluud, L. L., Villumsen, J., & Gluud, C. N. (2001) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-135-11-200112040-00010 · Cited by 2,266
Investigating and dealing with publication and other biases in meta-analysis
Sterne, J. A. C., Egger, M., & Smith, G. D. (2001) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.323.7304.101 · Cited by 2,225
Flagged first, then by citations
1 of the 54 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 201–232 of 232
Buckley, P. F. (2015) · Clinical Schizophrenia & Related Psychoses · doi:10.3371/csrp.bu.041215
Does the dominant hand’s use affect the complication rates in prosthetic breast reconstruction?
Jeong, S. H., Hwang, E., Ha, H. J., Kim, T. H., Kim, D. Y., Kim, C. H., Kim, S., & Ahn, H. C. (2023) · Archives of Aesthetic Plastic Surgery · doi:10.14730/aaps.2023.00899
Li, F., Han, M., Zhang, J., Ji, J., Wu, Y., & Wei, J. (2023) · International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics · doi:10.1002/ijgo.15272
Yadav, S. (2024) · The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice · doi:10.5005/jp-journals-10024-3615
Intermittent Fasting: A Potential Bridge for Metabolic Health and Quality of Life
(2023) · Obesity and Diabetes Research · doi:10.47275/2692-0964-124
Wang, H., Song, J., Lin, Y., Dai, W., Gao, Y., Qin, L., Chen, Y., Tam, W., Wu, X., & Chung, V. C. (2022) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.20076599
Wang, H., Song, J., Lin, Y., Dai, W., Gao, Y., Qin, L., Chen, Y., Tam, W., Wu, X., & Chung, V. C. (2022) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.20076596
Dhippayom, T., Boonpattharatthiti, K., Kategeaw, W., Hong, H., Chaiyakunapruk, N., Barnes, G. D., & Witt, D. M. (2024) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4789899
Oftalmología basada en la evidencia
Fernández, J. (2024) · Oftalmología clínica y experimental. · doi:10.70313/2718.7446.v17.n02.318
Wang, H., Song, J., Lin, Y., Dai, W., Gao, Y., Qin, L., Chen, Y., Tam, W., Wu, I. X., & Chung, V. C. (2022) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.20076605
Wang, H., Song, J., Lin, Y., Dai, W., Gao, Y., Qin, L., Chen, Y., Tam, W., Wu, I. X., & Chung, V. C. (2022) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.20076602
Wang, H., Song, J., Lin, Y., Dai, W., Gao, Y., Qin, L., Chen, Y., Tam, W., Wu, I. X., & Chung, V. C. (2022) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.20076626
Wang, H., Song, J., Lin, Y., Dai, W., Gao, Y., Qin, L., Chen, Y., Tam, W., Wu, I. X., & Chung, V. C. (2022) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.20076611
Wang, H., Song, J., Lin, Y., Dai, W., Gao, Y., Qin, L., Chen, Y., Tam, W., Wu, I. X., & Chung, V. C. (2022) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.20076623
Patikorn, C., Saidoung, P., Pham, T., Phisalprapa, P., Lee, Y. Y., Varady, K. A., Veettil, S. K., & Chaiyakunapruk, N. (2023) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.23208013
Patikorn, C., Saidoung, P., Pham, T., Phisalprapa, P., Lee, Y. Y., Varady, K. A., Veettil, S. K., & Chaiyakunapruk, N. (2023) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.23208016
Wang, H., Song, J., Lin, Y., Dai, W., Gao, Y., Qin, L., Chen, Y., Tam, W., Wu, I. X., & Chung, V. C. (2022) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.20076593
Wang, H., Song, J., Lin, Y., Dai, W., Gao, Y., Qin, L., Chen, Y., Tam, W., Wu, I. X., & Chung, V. C. (2022) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.20076617
Yu, J., Wu, J., Lu, J., Wei, X. X., Zheng, K., Liu, B., Xiao, W., Shi, Q., Xiong, L., & Ren, Z. (2024) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.26621377
Wang, H., Song, J., Lin, Y., Dai, W., Gao, Y., Qin, L., Chen, Y., Tam, W., Wu, I. X., & Chung, V. C. (2022) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.20076614
Wang, H., Song, J., Lin, Y., Dai, W., Gao, Y., Qin, L., Chen, Y., Tam, W., Wu, I. X., & Chung, V. C. (2022) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.20076620
Wang, H., Song, J., Lin, Y., Dai, W., Gao, Y., Qin, L., Chen, Y., Tam, W., Wu, I. X., & Chung, V. C. (2022) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.20076608
Effectiveness of Telerehabilitation After Total Knee Arthroplasty: An Umbrella Review.
Xu, H., Lou, V. W. Q., Guo, Z., Di, R., Zhang, X., & Liu, Y.-J. (2026) · Journal of Arthroplasty · doi:10.1016/j.arth.2026.02.041
Clinical outcomes of finerenone in heart failure: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Mylavarapu, M., Kiyani, M., Ndakotsu, A., Vats, V., Karnan, N., Palaparthi, E. C., Anjum, M., Kodali, L. S. M., Jamshed, A., & Cabrera, F. E. P. (2026) · World Journal of Cardiology · doi:10.4330/wjc.v18.i4.118879
Duc, T. Q., Di, K. N., Khoa, D. D., Huyen, N. T. H., Khanh, N. V., & Trang, T. T. (2026) · Nutrition & Metabolism · doi:10.1186/s12986-026-01130-3
Institutional Use of Meta-Research to Manage Conflict of Interest
Lozada-Martínez, I. D., Hernández-Páez, D. A., & Visconti-Lopez, F. J. (2026) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-27479-3_7
Rashid, M., Lee, E. L., Veettil, S. K., Dhippayom, T., Cheng, A. Y. Y., SIMONETTI, J. S., & Chaiyakunapruk, N. (2026) · Obesity Reviews · doi:10.1111/obr.70198
Chen, W.-X., Li, Y.-Z., Kang, L.-D., Jiang, X., Chen, Y.-H., Yang, D., Wang, Y., Zhao, Y., Liu, F.-H., Liu, J.-X., et al. (2026) · British Journal of Sports Medicine · doi:10.1136/bjsports-2026-111792
Raccagni, N. G., Dotti, M., Lightfoot, Y. A., Loda, R., Baker, M. S., Heihre, J. M., Helmy, A. E., Cinotti, R., & Citerio, G. (2026) · Neurocritical Care · doi:10.1007/s12028-026-02634-9
Wang, Q., Zhong, J., Qi, K., Bao, H., Wang, Y., Guo, S., & Chen, A. (2026) · Psychiatry Research · doi:10.1016/j.psychres.2026.117459
Boonpattharatthiti, K., Lawin, S., Limhengsin, P., Dhippayom, T., & Danwilai, K. (2026) · Supportive Care in Cancer · doi:10.1007/s00520-026-11354-x
Metadata
- Authors
- Dechartres, A., Altman, D. G., Trinquart, L., Boutron, I., & Ravaud, P.
- Affiliations
- Centre de Recherche Epidémiologie et Statistique, INSERM U1153, Paris, France2Centre d’Épidémiologie Clinique, Hôpital Hôtel Dieu, Assistance Publique des Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris, France3Faculté de Médecine, Université Paris Descartes, Sorbonne Paris Cit
- University of Oxford (GB)
- Inserm (FR)
- Venue
- JAMA
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 2014-08-13
- Volume
- 312
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 623
- ISSN
- 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
- 0098-7484
- OpenAlex
- W2108868101
- Cited by
- 233
- References
- 54
- Citations by year
- 2026: 15 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 25 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 25 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 18 · 2017: 34 · 2016: 23 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 8
- FWCI
- 24.79
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- JAMA (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Cancer Research UK (16895)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Delphi Technique in Research
- Keywords
- analytical strategies, treatment effect estimation, small-study effects, risk of bias, trial size, subjective outcomes, objective outcomes, publication bias, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, randomized controlled trials
- MeSH terms
- Humans, Research Design, Meta-Analysis as Topic, Confidence Intervals, Odds Ratio, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Treatment Outcome
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
