Seriously misleading results using inverse of Freeman‐Tukey double arcsine transformation in meta‐analysis of single proportions
Open accessAbstract
Standard generic inverse variance methods for the combination of single proportions are based on transformed proportions using the logit, arcsine, and Freeman-Tukey double arcsine transformations. Generalized linear mixed models are another more elaborate approach. Irrespective of the approach, meta-analysis results are typically back-transformed to the original scale in order to ease interpretation. Whereas the back-transformation of meta-analysis results is straightforward for most transformations, this is not the case for the Freeman-Tukey double arcsine transformation, albeit possible. In this case study with five studies, we demonstrate how seriously misleading the back-transformation of the Freeman-Tukey double arcsine transformation can be. We conclude that this transformation should only be used with special caution for the meta-analysis of single proportions due to potential problems with the back-transformation. Generalized linear mixed models seem to be a promising alternative.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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?
The Freeman-Tukey double arcsine transformation has been recommended as the preferred method for transformation, although more recently it has come under question.
“This has been recommended as the preferred methods for transformation [15, 18], although more recently it has come under question [19].”
From How are systematic reviews of prevalence conducted? A methodological study (2020) · cites this paper as [19]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
A basic introduction to fixed-effect and random-effects models for meta-analysis
Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P. T., & Rothstein, H. R. (2010) · Research Synthesis Methods · doi:10.1002/jrsm.12 · Cited by 6,793 · see citing works
Categorical data analysis: Away from ANOVAs (transformation or not) and towards logit mixed models
Jaeger, T. F. (2008) · Journal of Memory and Language · doi:10.1016/j.jml.2007.11.007 · Cited by 3,317 · see citing works
The arcsine is asinine: the analysis of proportions in ecology.
Warton, D., & Hui, F. K. C. (2011) · Ecology · doi:10.1890/10-0340.1 · Cited by 2,306 · see citing works
Barendregt, J. J., Doi, S. A., Lee, Y. Y., Norman, R. E., & Vos, T. (2013) · Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health · doi:10.1136/jech-2013-203104 · Cited by 2,169 · see citing works
Methods to estimate the between‐study variance and its uncertainty in meta‐analysis
Veroniki, A. A., Jackson, D., Viechtbauer, W., Bender, R., Bowden, J., Knapp, G., Kuss, O., Higgins, J. P., Langan, D., & Salanti, G. (2016) · Research Synthesis Methods · doi:10.1002/jrsm.1164 · Cited by 1,685 · see citing works
Global prevalence of anxiety disorders: a systematic review and meta-regression
Baxter, A. J., Scott, K. M., Vos, T., & Whiteford, H. A. (2013) · Psychological Medicine · doi:10.1017/s003329171200147x · Cited by 1,537 · see citing works
Stijnen, T., Hamza, T. H., & Özdemir, P. (2010) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.4040 · Cited by 757 · see citing works
The binomial distribution of meta-analysis was preferred to model within-study variability
Hamza, T. H., van Houwelingen, H. C., & Stijnen, T. (2007) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2007.03.016 · Cited by 388 · see citing works
Greenaway, C. A., Ma, A. T., Kloda, L. A., Klein, M. B., Cnossen, S., Schwarzer, G., & Shrier, I. (2015) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0141715 · Cited by 107 · see citing works
Self-citationThe Epidemiology of Hepatitis C Virus in the Fertile Crescent: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Chemaitelly, H. S., Chaabna, K., & Abu-Raddad, L. J. (2015) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0135281 · Cited by 67 · see citing works
Self-citationDetecting and describing heterogeneity in meta-analysis
Hardy, R. J., & Thompson, S. G. (1998) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/(sici)1097-0258(19980430)17:8
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 6
- [6]Pettigrew HM, Gart JJ, Thomas DG. The bias and higher cumulants of the logarithm of a binomial variate. Biometrika. 1986; 73: 425‐ 435.
- [7]Berkson J. Application of the logistic function to bio‐assay. J Am Stat Assoc. 1944; 39(227): 357‐ 365.
- [9]Freeman MF, Tukey JW. Transformations related to the angular and the square root. Ann Math Stat. 1950; 21: 607‐ 611.
- [11]Miller JJ. The inverse of the Freeman‐Tukey double arcsine transformation. Am Stat. 1978; 32(4): 138.
- [13]Schwarzer G. meta: an R package for meta‐analysis. R News. 2007; 7(3): 40‐ 45.
- [14]Agresti A, Coull BA. Approximate is better than exact for interval estimation of binomial proportions. Am Stat. 1998; 52: 119‐ 125.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Quek, J., Chan, K. E., Wong, Z. Y., Tan, C., Tan, B., Lim, W. H., Tan, D. J. H., Tang, A. S. P., Tay, P., Xiao, J., et al. (2023) · The Lancet Gastroenterology & Hepatology · doi:10.1016/s2468-1253(22)00317-x · Cited by 749 · see citing works
Global Prevalence of Young-Onset Dementia: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Hendriks, S., Peetoom, K., Bakker, C., van der Flier, W. M., Papma, J. M., Koopmans, R., Verhey, F. R. J., de Vugt, M., Köhler, S., Young-Onset Dementia Epidemiology Study Group, et al. (2021) · JAMA Neurology · doi:10.1001/jamaneurol.2021.2161 · Cited by 409 · see citing works
En Li Cho, E., Ang, C. Z., Quek, J., Fu, C. E., Lim, L. K. E., Heng, Z. E. Q., Tan, D. J. H., Lim, W. H., Yong, J. N., Zeng, R., et al. (2023) · Gut · doi:10.1136/gutjnl-2023-330110 · Cited by 380 · see citing works
How are systematic reviews of prevalence conducted? A methodological study
on behalf of the Prevalence Estimates Reviews – Systematic Review Methodology Group (PERSyst), Borges Migliavaca, C., Stein, C., Colpani, V., Barker, T. H., Munn, Z., & Falavigna, M. (2020) · BMC Medical Research Methodology · doi:10.1186/s12874-020-00975-3 · Cited by 359 · see citing works
Meta-analysis of proportions using generalized linear mixed models.
Lin, L., & Chu, H. (2020) · Epidemiology · doi:10.1097/ede.0000000000001232 · Cited by 345 · see citing works
Suicide, self-harm and suicidal ideation during COVID-19: A systematic review
Farooq, S., Tunmore, J., Wajid Ali, M., & Ayub, M. (2021) · Psychiatry Research · doi:10.1016/j.psychres.2021.114228 · Cited by 350 · see citing works
Deng, J., Zhou, F., Hou, W., Heybati, K., Lohit, S., Abbas, U., Silver, Z., Wong, C. Y., Chang, O., Huang, E., et al. (2023) · Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1111/nyas.14947 · Cited by 283 · see citing works
PTSD in the Year Following Sexual Assault: A Meta-Analysis of Prospective Studies
Dworkin, E. R., Jaffe, A. E., Bedard-Gilligan, M., & Fitzpatrick, S. (2023) · Trauma, Violence, & Abuse · doi:10.1177/15248380211032213 · Cited by 209 · see citing works
“…time point and calculated n based on the reported proportion with PTSD at that time point.1 Consistent with recommendations for meta-analyses of single proportions (Schwarzer et al., 2019), arcsine square root transformations were used for analyses to normalize and stabilize sampling distributions.”
MethodToh, J. Z. K., Pan, X.-H., Tay, P. W. L., Ng, C. H., Yong, J. N., Xiao, J., Koh, J. H., Tan, E. Y., Tan, E. X. X., Dan, Y. Y., et al. (2022) · Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology · doi:10.1016/j.cgh.2021.09.021 · Cited by 130 · see citing works
Parravano, M., Petri, D., Maurutto, E., Lucenteforte, E., Menchini, F., Lanzetta, P., Varano, M., van Nispen, R. M. A., & Virgili, G. (2021) · JAMA Ophthalmology · doi:10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2021.1557 · Cited by 126 · see citing works
Xiao, J., Lim, L. K. E., Ng, C. H., Tan, D. J. H., Lim, W. H., Ho, C. S. H., Tan, E. X. X., Sanyal, A. J., & Muthiah, M. D. (2021) · Frontiers in Medicine · doi:10.3389/fmed.2021.691696 · Cited by 94 · see citing works
Schwarzer, G., & Rücker, G. (2022) · Methods in Molecular Biology · doi:10.1007/978-1-0716-1566-9_10 · Cited by 90 · see citing works
Self-citationZeng, R. W., Ong, C. E. Y., Ong, E. Y. H., Chung, C. H., Lim, W. H., Xiao, J., Danpanichkul, P., Law, J. H., Syn, N., Chee, D., et al. (2024) · Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology · doi:10.1016/j.cgh.2024.06.026 · Cited by 47 · see citing works
Diagnostic accuracy of teledermatology for skin diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Martyin, K., Meznerics, F. A., Bokor, L. A., Szabó, B., Hegyi, P., Kiss, N., & Bánvölgyi, A. (2026) · Frontiers in Medicine · doi:10.3389/fmed.2026.1739592 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
- Authors
- Schwarzer, G., Chemaitelly, H., Abu‐Raddad, L. J., & Rücker, G.
- Affiliations
- University of Freiburg (DE)
- Cornell University (US)
- Infectious Disease Epidemiology Group, Weill Cornell Medicine‐Qatar Cornell University, Qatar Foundation, Education City Doha Qatar
- Corresponding author
- Schwarzer, Guido
- Venue
- Research Synthesis Methods
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2019-04-23
- Volume
- 10
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 476-483
- ISSN
- 1759-2879 (ISSN-L)
- 1759-2887
- PMC
- PMC6767151
- OpenAlex
- W2930850699
- Cited by
- 625
- References
- 11
- Citations by year
- 2026: 118 · 2025: 91 · 2024: 76 · 2023: 79 · 2022: 99 · 2021: 112 · 2020: 42 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 1
- FWCI
- 43.49
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Research Synthesis Methods (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- LSHTM Research Online (London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine) (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (RU1747/1-2)
- Qatar National Research Fund (9-040-3-008)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Epidemiology
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
- Keywords
- back-transformation, logit transformation, arcsine transformation, generalized linear mixed models
- MeSH terms
- Algorithms, Antibodies, Viral, Data Interpretation, Statistical, Hepatitis C, Humans, Nepal, Research Design, Software, Statistics as Topic, Meta-Analysis as Topic, Reproducibility of Results, Linear Models, Hepacivirus, Databases, Factual, Sample Size
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
