Meta‐analyses of the incidence and prevalence of schizophrenia: conceptual and methodological issues
Open accessAbstract
While meta‐analytic techniques are routine in the synthesis of data from randomized controlled trials, there are no clear guidelines on how best to summarize frequency data such as incidence and prevalence estimates. Based on data from two recent systematic reviews of the incidence and prevalence of schizophrenia, this paper explores some of the conceptual and methodological issues related to the meta‐analyses of frequency estimates in epidemiology. Because variations in the incidence and prevalence of disorders such as schizophrenia can be informative, there is a case against collapsing data into one pooled estimate. Variations in frequency estimates can be displayed graphically, or summarized with quantiles around measures of central tendency. If pooled estimated are of interest, then researchers need to be aware that studies based on large samples will leverage greater weight on the pooled value. Based on systematic reviews of the incidence and prevalence of schizophrenia, we explore if these and related issues are of practical concern. When used with appropriate caution, meta‐analysis can complement the synthesis of frequency data in epidemiology; however, researchers interested in variation should not rely on meta‐analysis alone. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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?
There has been debate regarding the appropriateness of meta-analysis within systematic reviews of prevalence.
“There has been debate regarding the appropriateness of meta-analysis within systematic reviews of prevalence, [14, 15] [16–18]”
From How are systematic reviews of prevalence conducted? A methodological study (2020) · cites this paper as [17]
The use of a random effects model is appropriate in systematic reviews of prevalence.
“The vast majority of meta-analyses used classic methods and a random effects model, which is appropriate in these types of reviews [17] [18].”
From How are systematic reviews of prevalence conducted? A methodological study (2020) · cites this paper as [17]
Cites
Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses
Higgins, J. P. T., Thompson, S. G., Deeks, J. J., & Altman, D. G. (2003) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.327.7414.557 · Cited by 63,139 · see citing works
Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta‐analysis
Higgins, J. P. T., & Thompson, S. G. (2002) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.1186 · Cited by 36,763 · see citing works
Stroup, D. F. (2000) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.283.15.2008 · Cited by 20,623 · see citing works
Meta-analysis: Principles and procedures
Egger, M., Smith, G. D., & Phillips, A. N. (1997) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.315.7121.1533 · Cited by 2,415 · see citing works
A Systematic Review of the Prevalence of Schizophrenia
Saha, S., Chant, D., Welham, J., & McGrath, J. (2005) · PLoS Medicine · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.0020141 · Cited by 2,168 · see citing works
Self-citationSaha, S., Chant, D., & McGrath, J. (2007) · Archives of General Psychiatry · doi:10.1001/archpsyc.64.10.1123 · Cited by 2,065 · see citing works
Self-citationSchizophrenia and migration: A meta-analysis and review
Cantor-Graae, E., & Selten, J.-P. (2005) · American Journal of Psychiatry · doi:10.1176/appi.ajp.162.1.12 · Cited by 1,237 · see citing works
McGrath, J., Saha, S., Welham, J., El Saadi, O., MacCauley, C., & Chant, D. (2004) · BMC Medicine · doi:10.1186/1741-7015-2-13 · Cited by 1,072 · see citing works
Self-citationA random‐effects regression model for meta‐analysis
Berkey, C. S., Hoaglin, D. C., Mosteller, F. C., & Colditz, G. A. (1995) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.4780140406 · Cited by 882 · see citing works
Sex Differences in the Risk of Schizophrenia: Evidence From Meta-analysis
Aleman, A., Kahn, R. S., & Selten, J.-P. (2003) · Archives of General Psychiatry · doi:10.1001/archpsyc.60.6.565 · Cited by 818 · see citing works
The global burden of disease in 1990: summary results, sensitivity analysis and future directions.
Murray, C. J. L., López, A. D., & Jamison, D. T. (1994) · PubMed · Cited by 524 · see citing works
Approaches to heterogeneity in meta‐analysis
Petitti, D. B. (2001) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.1091 · Cited by 469 · see citing works
Prevalence and Incidence Studies of Schizophrenic Disorders: A Systematic Review of the Literature
Goldner, E. M., Hsu, L., Waraich, P. S., & Somers, J. M. (2002) · The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry · doi:10.1177/070674370204700904 · Cited by 340 · see citing works
Strengths and limitations of meta-analysis: Larger studies may be more reliable
Flather, M. D., Farkouh, M. E., Pogue, J. M., & Yusuf, S. (1997) · Controlled Clinical Trials · doi:10.1016/s0197-2456(97)00024-x · Cited by 233 · see citing works
Invited commentary: benefits of heterogeneity in meta-analysis of data from epidemiologic studies
Berlin, J. A. (1995) · American Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a117645 · Cited by 191 · see citing works
Variations in the Incidence of Schizophrenia: Data Versus Dogma
McGrath, J. J. (2005) · Schizophrenia Bulletin · doi:10.1093/schbul/sbi052 · Cited by 178 · see citing works
Self-citationPooling Research Results: Benefits and Limitations of Meta-Analysis
Ioannidis, J. P. A., & Lau, J. (1999) · The Joint Commission Journal on Quality Improvement · doi:10.1016/s1070-3241(16)30460-6 · Cited by 157 · see citing works
Kraemer, H. C., Gardner, C., Brooks, J. O., & Yesavage, J. A. (1998) · Psychological Methods · doi:10.1037/1082-989x.3.1.23 · Cited by 141 · see citing works
Systematic reviews in epidemiology: why are we so far behind?
Dickersin, K. (2002) · International Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1093/ije/31.1.6 · Cited by 118 · see citing works
Clarke, M. J., & Stewart, L. A. (1994) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.309.6960.1007 · Cited by 117 · see citing works
Invited commentary: Gaining traction on the epidemiologic landscape of schizophrenia.
McGrath, J. (2003) · American Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1093/aje/kwg119 · Cited by 18 · see citing works
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Munn, Z., Moola, S., Lisy, K., Riitano, D., & Tufanaru, C. (2015) · International Journal of Evidence-Based Healthcare · doi:10.1097/xeb.0000000000000054 · Cited by 3,131 · see citing works
The global prevalence of common mental disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis 1980–2013
Steel, Z., Marnane, C., Iranpour, C., Chey, T., Jackson, J. W., Patel, V., & Silove, D. (2014) · International Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1093/ije/dyu038 · Cited by 2,846 · see citing works
van Os, J., Linscott, R. J., Myin-Germeys, I., Delespaul, P., & Krabbendam, L. (2009) · Psychological Medicine · doi:10.1017/s0033291708003814 · Cited by 2,343 · see citing works
Schizophrenia: A Concise Overview of Incidence, Prevalence, and Mortality
McGrath, J., Saha, S., Chant, D., & Welham, J. (2008) · Epidemiologic Reviews · doi:10.1093/epirev/mxn001 · Cited by 2,280 · see citing works
Self-citationPlea for routinely presenting prediction intervals in meta-analysis.
IntHout, J., Ioannidis, J. P. A., Rovers, M. M., & Goeman, J. J. (2016) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2015-010247 · Cited by 2,264 · see citing works
Linscott, R. J., & van Os, J. (2013) · Psychological Medicine · doi:10.1017/s0033291712001626 · Cited by 1,181 · see citing works
Moreno-Küstner, B., Martín, C., & Pastor, L. (2018) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0195687 · Cited by 562 · see citing works
The prevalence of suicidal thoughts and behaviours among college students: a meta-analysis
Mortier, P., Cuijpers, P., Kiekens, G., Auerbach, R. P., Demyttenaere, K., Green, J. G., Kessler, R. C., Nock, M. K., & Bruffaerts, R. (2018) · Psychological Medicine · doi:10.1017/s0033291717002215 · Cited by 572 · 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
Simeone, J. C., Ward, A. J., Rotella, P., Collins, J., & Windisch, R. (2015) · BMC Psychiatry · doi:10.1186/s12888-015-0578-7 · Cited by 327 · see citing works
Linscott, R. J., & van Os, J. (2010) · Annual Review of Clinical Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev.clinpsy.032408.153506 · Cited by 324 · see citing works
Percie du Sert, O., Potvin, S., Lipp, O., Dellazizzo, L., Laurelli, M., Breton, R., Lalonde, P., Phraxayavong, K., O'Connor, K., Pelletier, J.-F., et al. (2018) · Schizophrenia Research · doi:10.1016/j.schres.2018.02.031 · Cited by 182 · see citing works
Recent mitochondrial DNA mutations increase the risk of developing common late-onset human diseases
Hudson, G., Gomez-Duran, A., Wilson, I. J., & Chinnery, P. F. (2014) · PLoS Genetics · doi:10.1371/journal.pgen.1004369 · Cited by 148 · see citing works
Hoffmann, F., Eggers, D., Pieper, D., Zeeb, H., & Allers, K. (2020) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2019.12.003 · Cited by 56 · see citing works
- Authors
- Saha, S., Chant, D., & Mcgrath, J.
- Affiliations
- Park Centre for Mental Health (AU)
- The University of Queensland (AU)
- Corresponding author
- Mcgrath, John
- Venue
- International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2008-02-19
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 55-61
- ISSN
- 1049-8931 (ISSN-L)
- 1557-0657
- PMC
- PMC6878550
- OpenAlex
- W2160589536
- Cited by
- 130
- References
- 21
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 10
- FWCI
- 11.27
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Griffith Research Online (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Schizophrenia research and treatment
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Epidemiology
- Keywords
- schizophrenia, incidence, prevalence, quantiles
- MeSH terms
- Humans, Schizophrenia, Incidence, Prevalence
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
