Notes on Subgroup Analyses and Meta‐Regression
Abstract
This chapter contains sections titled: Introduction Computational model Multiple comparisons Software Analyses of subgroups and regression analyses are observational Statistical power for subgroup analyses and meta-regression Summary points
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
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?
Several subgroups, such as intervention durations for ALM, included fewer than six RCTs, which may not have adequate power for detecting differences among subgroups.
“Finally, inadequate statistical power for subgroup analyses was noted. Several subgroups (such as intervention durations for ALM) included a small number of RCTs (less than six), which may not have adequate power for detecting differences among subgroups [71,72]; the results of such subgroup analyses should be cautiously interpreted.”
Cites
Improved tests for a random effects meta‐regression with a single covariate
Knapp, G., & Hartung, J. (2003) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.1482 · Cited by 2,075 · see citing works
Controlling the risk of spurious findings from meta-regression
Higgins, J. P. T., & Thompson, S. G. (2004) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.1752 · Cited by 1,267 · see citing works
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Kasper, L. J., Alderson, R. M., & Hudec, K. L. (2012) · Clinical Psychology Review · doi:10.1016/j.cpr.2012.07.001 · Cited by 414 · see citing works
Liao, C.-D., Chen, H.-C., Huang, S.-W., & Liou, T.-H. (2019) · Nutrients · doi:10.3390/nu11081713 · Cited by 189 · see citing works
Methods for second order meta-analysis and illustrative applications
Schmidt, F. L., & Oh, I.-S. (2013) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2013.03.002 · Cited by 151 · see citing works
Correia, J. C., Waqas, A., Assal, J.-P., Davies, M. J., Somers, F., Golay, A., & Pataky, Z. (2023) · Frontiers in Medicine · doi:10.3389/fmed.2022.996528 · Cited by 104 · see citing works
- Authors
- Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P. T., & Rothstein, H. R.
- Affiliations
- Biostat (United States) (US)
- Northwestern University (US)
- Baruch College (US)
- Venue
- Introduction to Meta‐Analysis
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2009-03-11
- Pages
- 205-212
- OpenAlex
- W1514150466
- Cited by
- 13
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 1 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 1
- Type
- other
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- 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
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Epidemiology
- Keywords
- subgroup analysis, meta-regression, statistical power, multiple comparisons, computational model, observational studies
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
