The DOI matches its Crossref record; 24 of the 24 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Metaprop: a Stata command to perform meta-analysis of binomial data
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Meta-analyses have become an essential tool in synthesizing evidence on clinical and epidemiological questions derived from a multitude of similar studies assessing the particular issue. Appropriate and accessible statistical software is needed to produce the summary statistic of interest. METHODS: Metaprop is a statistical program implemented to perform meta-analyses of proportions in Stata. It builds further on the existing Stata procedure metan which is typically used to pool effects (risk ratios, odds ratios, differences of risks or means) but which is also used to pool proportions. Metaprop implements procedures which are specific to binomial data and allows computation of exact binomial and score test-based confidence intervals. It provides appropriate methods for dealing with proportions close to or at the margins where the normal approximation procedures often break down, by use of the binomial distribution to model the within-study variability or by allowing Freeman-Tukey double arcsine transformation to stabilize the variances. Metaprop was applied on two published meta-analyses: 1) prevalence of HPV-infection in women with a Pap smear showing ASC-US; 2) cure rate after treatment for cervical precancer using cold coagulation. RESULTS: The first meta-analysis showed a pooled HPV-prevalence of 43% (95% CI: 38%-48%). In the second meta-analysis, the pooled percentage of cured women was 94% (95% CI: 86%-97%). CONCLUSION: By using metaprop, no studies with 0% or 100% proportions were excluded from the meta-analysis. Furthermore, study specific and pooled confidence intervals always were within admissible values, contrary to the original publication, where metan was used.
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
Figures
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.
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 source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“To ensure proportionate weight distribution to studies presenting extreme prevalence (near 0 or 1), the Freeman-Tukey arcsine methodology was applied (Nyaga et al., 2014).”
From Maternal colonization or infection with extended-spectrum beta-lactamase-producing Enterobacteriaceae in Africa: A systematic review and meta-analysis (2017) · cites this paper as Nyaga et al., 2014
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
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
Meta-analysis in clinical trials
DerSimonian, R., & Laird, N. (1986) · Controlled Clinical Trials · doi:10.1016/0197-2456(86)90046-2 · Cited by 39,552
Addelman, S., Box, G. E. P., Hunter, W. G., & Hunter, J. S. (1979) · Technometrics · doi:10.2307/1267766 · Cited by 6,753
THE USE OF CONFIDENCE OR FIDUCIAL LIMITS ILLUSTRATED IN THE CASE OF THE BINOMIAL
Clopper, C. J., & Pearson, E. S. (1934) · Biometrika · doi:10.1093/biomet/26.4.404 · Cited by 5,327
Approximate Inference in Generalized Linear Mixed Models
Breslow, N. E., & Clayton, D. G. (1993) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.1080/01621459.1993.10594284 · Cited by 4,662
Probable Inference, the Law of Succession, and Statistical Inference
Wilson, E. B. (1927) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.1080/01621459.1927.10502953 · Cited by 4,476
Interval Estimation for a Binomial Proportion
Brown, L. D., Cai, T., & Dasgupta, A. (2001) · Statistical Science · doi:10.1214/ss/1009213286 · Cited by 3,746
Approximate is Better than “Exact” for Interval Estimation of Binomial Proportions
Agresti, A., & Coull, B. A. (1998) · The American Statistician · doi:10.1080/00031305.1998.10480550 · Cited by 3,223
Transformations Related to the Angular and the Square Root
Freeman, M. F., & Tukey, J. W. (1950) · The Annals of Mathematical Statistics · doi:10.1214/aoms/1177729756 · Cited by 2,634
Resampling-Based Multiple Testing: Examples and Methods for p-Value Adjustment.
Martin, M. A., Westfall, P. H., & Young, S. S. (1994) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2533464 · Cited by 1,713
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
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 1,001–1,005 of 1,005
Andualem, Z., Nigussie Azene, Z., Dessie, A., Dagne, H., & Dagnew, B. (2020) · Multidisciplinary Respiratory Medicine · doi:10.4081/mrm.2020.710 · Cited by 17
Severe falciparum malaria in pregnancy in Southeast Asia: a multi-centre retrospective cohort study
Saito, M., Phyo, A. P., Chu, C., Proux, S., Rijken, M. J., Beau, C., Win, H. H., Archasuksan, L., Wiladphaingern, J., Phu, N. H., et al. (2023) · BMC Medicine · doi:10.1186/s12916-023-02991-8 · Cited by 14
Li, W., Yang, B., & Shi, J. (2024) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0305218 · Cited by 14
“The efficacy of pulpotomy in permanent teeth with carious pulp exposure was estimated by calculating the proportion of overall success with corresponding 95% confidence interval (95%CI) using the metaprop package in STATA [27].”
Parthasarathi, A., Puvvada, R. K., Basappa, S., Krishna, M. T., & P A, M. (2022) · Wellcome Open Research · doi:10.12688/wellcomeopenres.17517.1 · Cited by 7
Does splitting a tablet obtain an accurate dose? A systematic review and meta‐ analysis
Chaudhri, K., Kearney, M., Di Tanna, G. L., Gnanenthiran, S. R., Day, R. O., Rodgers, A., & Atkins, E. R. (2022) · Journal of Pharmacy Practice and Research · doi:10.1002/jppr.1843 · Cited by 6
Metadata
- Authors
- Nyaga, V. N., Arbyn, M., & Aerts, M.
- Affiliations
- Institut Scientifique de Santé Publique (BE)
- Hasselt University (BE)
- Corresponding author
- Arbyn, Marc
- Venue
- Archives of Public Health
- Published
- 2014-11-10
- Volume
- 72
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 39-39
- ISSN
- 0778-7367 (ISSN-L)
- 2049-3258
- PMC
- PMC4373114
- OpenAlex
- W2133564174
- Cited by
- 2,139
- References
- 24
- Citations by year
- 2026: 88 · 2025: 157 · 2024: 249 · 2023: 272 · 2022: 286 · 2021: 321 · 2020: 296 · 2019: 166 · 2018: 133 · 2017: 91 · 2016: 61 · 2015: 16 · 2014: 1
- FWCI
- 15.42
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Archives of Public Health (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Document Server@UHasselt (UHasselt) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Funders
- European Commission (282562, 603019, FP7‐HEALTH‐2011)
- Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
- FP7 Health (FP7-HEALTH-2011-282562, 603019)
- 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 › Probability and Statistical Research
- Keywords
- Stata command, binomial data, HPV prevalence, ASCUS, cold coagulation
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
