The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Meta‐analysis of skewed data: Combining results reported on log‐transformed or raw scales
Open accessAbstract
When literature‐based meta‐analyses involve outcomes with skewed distributions, the best available data can sometimes be a mixture of results presented on the raw scale and results presented on the logarithmic scale. We review and develop methods for transforming between these results for two‐group studies, such as clinical trials and prospective or cross‐sectional epidemiological studies. These allow meta‐analyses to be conducted using all studies and on a common scale. The methods can also be used to produce a meta‐analysis of ratios of geometric means when skewed data are reported on the raw scale for every study. We compare three methods, two of which have alternative standard error formulae, in an application and in a series of simulation studies. We conclude that an approach based on a log‐normal assumption for the raw data is reasonably robust to different true distributions; and we provide new standard error approximations for this method. An assumption can be made that the standard deviations in the two groups are equal. This increases precision of the estimates, but if incorrect can lead to very misleading results. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Overview
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
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The meta-analysis of response ratios in experimental ecology
Hedges, L. V., Gurevitch, J., & Curtis, P. S. (1999) · Ecology · doi:10.1890/0012-9658(1999)080[1150:tmaorr]2.0.co;2 · Cited by 4,704
Metan: fixed- and random-effects meta-analysis
Harris, R. J., Deeks, J. J., Altman, D. G., Bradburn, M. J., Harbord, R. M., & Sterne, J. A. C. (2008) · The Stata Journal: Promoting communications on statistics and Stata · doi:10.1177/1536867x0800800102 · Cited by 1,027
Espinosa, J. C. (2004) · Cited by 939
Meta‐Analysis Of Controlled Clinical Trials
Whitehead, A. (2002) · doi:10.1002/0470854200 · Cited by 827
The log transformation is special
Keene, O. N. (1995) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.4780140810 · Cited by 498
Sagoo, G. S., Tatt, I., Salanti, G., Butterworth, A. S., Sarwar, N., van Maarle, M., Jukema, J. W., Wiman, B., Kastelein, J. J. P., Bennet, A. M., et al. (2008) · American Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1093/aje/kwn235 · Cited by 132
Self-citationCOMBINING SUMMARIES OF BINARY OUTCOMES WITH THOSE OF CONTINUOUS OUTCOMES IN A META-ANALYSIS
Whitehead, A., Bailey, A. J., & Elbourne, D. R. (1999) · Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics · doi:10.1081/bip-100100997 · Cited by 38
Cited by
Analysing data and undertaking meta‐analyses
Deeks, J. J., Higgins, J. P., Altman, D. G., & on behalf of the Cochrane Statistical Methods Group (2019) · Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions · doi:10.1002/9781119536604.ch10 · Cited by 2,672
Self-citationAnalysing Data and Undertaking Meta‐Analyses
Deeks, J. J., Higgins, J. P., & Altman, D. G. (2008) · Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions · doi:10.1002/9780470712184.ch9 · Cited by 1,800
Self-citationBaumeister, D., Akhtar, R., Ciufolini, S., Pariante, C. M., & Mondelli, V (2016) · Molecular Psychiatry · doi:10.1038/mp.2015.67 · Cited by 1,084
Osimo, E. F., Pillinger, T., Rodriguez, I. M., Khandaker, G. M., Pariante, C. M., & Howes, O. D. (2020) · Brain, Behavior, and Immunity · doi:10.1016/j.bbi.2020.02.010 · Cited by 937
Choosing effect measures and computing estimates of effect
Higgins, J. P., Li, T., & Deeks, J. J. (2019) · Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions · doi:10.1002/9781119536604.ch6 · Cited by 977
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Higgins, J. P. T., White, I. R., & Anzures‐Cabrera, J.
- Venue
- Statistics in Medicine
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2008-09-17
- Volume
- 27
- Issue
- 29
- Pages
- 6072-6092
- ISSN
- 0277-6715 (ISSN-L)
- 1097-0258
- OpenAlex
- W2093536899
- Cited by
- 481
- References
- 7
- FWCI
- 8.24
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
