The DOI matches its Crossref record; 28 of the 28 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Random-Effects Meta-analysis of Inconsistent Effects: A Time for Change
Abstract
A primary goal of meta-analysis is to improve the estimation of treatment effects by pooling results of similar studies. This article explains how the most widely used method for pooling heterogeneous studies--the Der Simonian-Laird (DL) estimator--can produce biased estimates with falsely high precision. A classic example is presented to show that use of the DL estimator can lead to erroneous conclusions. Particular problems with the DL estimator are discussed, and several alternative methods for summarizing heterogeneous evidence are presented. The authors support replacing universal use of the DL estimator with analyses based on a critical synthesis that recognizes the uncertainty in the evidence,focuses on describing and explaining the probable sources of variation in the evidence, and uses random-effects estimates that provide more accurate confidence limits than the DL estimator.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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?
In the citing paper
“The Knapp-Hartung approach (SJ) is known to suit systematic reviews including few studies, particularly when dealing with 5 or fewer trials [49].”
From Mindfulness- And acceptance-based interventions for patients with fibromyalgia - A systematic review and meta-analyses (2019) · cites this paper as [49]
In the citing paper
“Furthermore, many frequentist estimation methods (including REML) sometimes fail to produce reliable confidence or prediction intervals.”
From A framework for meta-analysis of prediction model studies with binary and time-to-event outcomes (2019) · cites this paper as [47]
In the citing paper
“when the heterogeneity is small and the study sizes are mixed, the Hartung–Knapp method produces confidence intervals that are too wide.46,47”
From A framework for meta-analysis of prediction model studies with binary and time-to-event outcomes (2019) · cites this paper as [47]
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
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
Conducting Meta-Analyses in R with the metafor Package
Viechtbauer, W. (2010) · Journal of Statistical Software · doi:10.18637/jss.v036.i03 · Cited by 20,464
A Re-Evaluation of Random-Effects Meta-Analysis
Higgins, J. P. T., Thompson, S. G., & Spiegelhalter, D. J. (2009) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A: Statistics in Society · doi:10.1111/j.1467-985x.2008.00552.x · Cited by 2,569
Random-effects model for meta-analysis of clinical trials: An update
DerSimonian, R., & Kacker, R. (2007) · Contemporary Clinical Trials · doi:10.1016/j.cct.2006.04.004 · Cited by 2,374
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
Meta‐Analysis Of Controlled Clinical Trials
Whitehead, A. (2002) · doi:10.1002/0470854200 · Cited by 827
A comparison of statistical methods for meta‐analysis
Brockwell, S. E., & Gordon, I. R. (2001) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.650 · Cited by 573
BORROWING STRENGTH FROM EXTERNAL TRIALS IN A META-ANALYSIS
Higgins, J. P. T., & WHITEHEAD, A. (1996) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/(sici)1097-0258(19961230)15:24 · Cited by 559
A LIKELIHOOD APPROACH TO META-ANALYSIS WITH RANDOM EFFECTS
Hardy, R., & Thompson, S. G. (1996) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/(sici)1097-0258(19960330)15:6 · Cited by 522
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- Weseley AC, 1962, Obstet Gynecol, 19, 355
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 301–400 of 452
Thompson, K. L., Chung, M., Handu, D., Gutschall, M. D., Jewell, S., Byham-Gray, L. D., & Parrott, J. S. (2019) · Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics · doi:10.1016/j.jand.2018.12.008 · Cited by 8
“Because the DerSimonian-Laird model may produce overly narrow CIs when sample sizes are small or effects are widely divergent, when possible (n 6 within the subgroup), permutated CIs were computed.(36,37) The permutation approach provides a more conservative CI estimation and thus avoids an inflation in the type I err…”
MethodTerasawa, T., Hamashima, C., Kato, K., Miyashiro, I., Yoshikawa, T., Takaku, R., & Nishida, H. (2019) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2018-026002 · Cited by 8
Estimating the reference interval from a fixed effects meta‐analysis
Cao, W., Siegel, L. K., Zhou, J., Zhu, M., Tong, T., Chen, Y., & Chu, H. (2021) · Research Synthesis Methods · doi:10.1002/jrsm.1488 · Cited by 8
“As a typical approach to the random effects model uses the estimated between-study variance to calculate the inverse variance weights to estimate the pooled mean,(22) this imprecision may lead to a less desirable estimate of the pooled mean and its confidence interval (CI).(23,24) The imprecise estimate of betweenstud…”
MethodSystematic Reviews of Prognostic Factor Studies
Riley, R. D., Moons, K. G. M., Altman, D. G., Collins, P. G. S., & Debray, T. P. A. (2022) · Wiley eBooks · doi:10.1002/9781119099369.ch17 · Cited by 8
Christensen, A. W., Tarp, S., Furst, D. E., Døssing, A., Amris, K., Bliddal, H., Taylor, P. C., & Christensen, R. (2015) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0136982 · Cited by 8
“Effect estimates were calculated using the SAS procedure "Proc Mixed" that fits mixed linear models including variance component models [22]; we chose this approach rather than the DerSimonian and Laird estimator [23] because the latter is likely to produce biased estimates with falsely high precision [24].”
MethodAutier, P., Doi, G., Mullie, P., Vankrunkelsven, P., D’Ecclesiis, O., & Gandini, S. (2025) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0303316 · Cited by 7
Alkabbani, W., Gamble, J., Eurich, D. T., Minhas‐Sandhu, J. K., Shah, B. R., Alsabbagh, M. W., & Zongo, A. (2021) · Diabetes & Metabolism · doi:10.1016/j.diabet.2021.101305 · Cited by 7
Wang, Z., Alzuabi, M. A., Morgan, R. L., Mustafa, R. A., Falck-Ytter, Y. T., Dahm, P., Sultan, S., & Murad, M. H. (2023) · BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine · doi:10.1136/bmjebm-2022-112053 · Cited by 7
Boyle, R. E., Jonker, L., Xirasagar, S., Okut, H., & Badgett, R. G. (2023) · Health Services Management Research · doi:10.1177/09514848231179175 · Cited by 8
Peng, C.-C., Liu, C.-Y., Kuo, N.-R., & Tung, T. (2019) · Evidence-based Complementary and Alternative Medicine · doi:10.1155/2019/3261280 · Cited by 7
“Another limitation to this study was the controversy surrounding random-effect models; that is, the assumption of normally distributed random effects violates the basic principle of randomization in statistical inference [28].”
BackgroundEkundayo, T. C. (2021) · The Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.145436 · Cited by 7
A Note on Cherry-Picking in Meta-Analyses
Yoneoka, D., & Rieck, B. (2023) · Entropy · doi:10.3390/e25040691 · Cited by 7
Miksza, J. K., Zaccardi, F., Kunutsor, S. K., Seidu, S., Davies, M. J., & Khunti, K. K. (2019) · Nutrition Metabolism and Cardiovascular Diseases · doi:10.1016/j.numecd.2019.06.022 · Cited by 7
“[12] A random-effect meta-analysis of the association between statin use and VTE events was performed separately for observational studies (most-adjusted estimates) and RCTs; we used the Knapp-Hartung method, instead of the widely used Der Simonian-Laird estimator, as the former is considered an improved alternative f…”
MethodEarly tracheostomy in critically ill patients: still too fast
McCREDIE, V. A., & Adhikari, N. K. J. (2014) · The Lancet Respiratory Medicine · doi:10.1016/s2213-2600(14)70141-9 · Cited by 7
Herbal Medicine in Children and Adults with Atopic Dermatitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Anheyer, M., Cramer, H., Ostermann, T., & Anheyer, D. (2024) · Dermatitis · doi:10.1089/derm.2024.0132 · Cited by 10
Tewari, J., Qidwai, K., Roy, S., Saxena, M., Rana, A., Tewari, A., Tewari, V., & Maheshwari, A. (2024) · Egyptian Heart Journal · doi:10.1186/s43044-024-00597-w · Cited by 5
“The data were pooled using pooled logarithm hazard ratios using random-effects inverse-variance models, with profile likelihood estimation [10].”
Korevaar, E., Turner, S., Forbes, A. B., Karahalios, A., Taljaard, M., & McKenzie, J. E. (2023) · Research Synthesis Methods · doi:10.1002/jrsm.1669 · Cited by 5
“The method chosen for inclusion in this study for its wide use in practice, 8,34,44 the Wald-type normal distribution (WT) confidence interval, 49 is calculated as: where z 1 (cid:2) α = 2 is the 1 (cid:2) α 2 (cid:2) (cid”
MethodECMO, ARDS and meta-analyses: Bayes to the rescue?
Graham, P. L., & Moran, J. L. (2020) · Journal of Critical Care · doi:10.1016/j.jcrc.2020.05.009 · Cited by 6
Mixed Model Analysis in Longitudinal Studies
Twisk, J. W. R. (2019) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108635660.010 · Cited by 6
Cell Lineage-Specific Differences in Clinical Behavior of Non-Functioning Pituitary Adenomas
van der Hoeven, L. S., Slagboom, T. N. A., Malekzadeh, A., Hoogmoed, J., Drent, M. L., Aronica, E., Stenvers, D. J., & Pereira, A. M. (2025) · The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism · doi:10.1210/clinem/dgaf112 · Cited by 5
Moran, J. L., & Linden, A. (2024) · BMC Medical Research Methodology · doi:10.1186/s12874-024-02215-4 · Cited by 5
“It was instructive to note that none of the currently considered meta-analyses reported using non-DSL estimators, despite concerns being raised nearly 10 years ago about biased estimates with falsely high precision with DSL estimator [117].”
Flávio‐Reis, V. H. P., Pessoa‐Gonçalves, Y. M., Diaz, C. A. V., Lamoglia, A. S. A., Desidério, C. S., & Oliveira, C. J. F. (2025) · Pain Management · doi:10.1080/17581869.2025.2467025 · Cited by 5
Shi, H., Su, X., Yan, B., Li, C., & Wang, L. (2022) · Renal Failure · doi:10.1080/0886022x.2021.2023023 · Cited by 5
“Because of the poor stability of the Der SimonianLaird procedure for small numbers of studies, we used the empirical Bayes procedure to estimate all outcomes [16,17].”
MethodMaximos, M., Pelletier, R., Elsayed, S., Maxwell, C. J., Houle, S. K. D., McConnell, B. M., & Gamble, J. (2024) · British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology · doi:10.1111/bcp.16366 · Cited by 5
“The Knapp-Hartang approach 25 was used to estimate between study heterogeneity for pairwise comparisons.”
Quality of meta-analyses for randomized trials in the field of hypertension
Roush, G. C., Amante, B., Singh, T., Ayele, H., Araoye, M., Yang, D., Kostis, W. J., Elliott, W. J., Kostis, J. B., & Berlin, J. A. (2016) · Journal of Hypertension · doi:10.1097/hjh.0000000000001094 · Cited by 5
“It has been shown that the DerSimonian–Laird model gives too many false positives, that is, indicates that there is statistical evidence for a particular outcome in which no such evidence exists, and that models such as the Knapp– Hartung model are more appropriate [26,27].”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialBias, coverage, and asymptotic behaviour of random effects meta-analysis
Johnson, K. R., Hayen, A. D., Lassere, M. N., & Mengersen, K. L. (2020) · International Journal of Evidence-Based Healthcare · doi:10.1097/xeb.0000000000000227 · Cited by 4
Chen, J. Z.-J., & Thijs, V. (2021) · Frontiers in Neurology · doi:10.3389/fneur.2021.613758 · Cited by 5
Bayesian robustness in meta‐analysis for studies with zero responses
Polo, F. J. V., Moreno, E., Negrín, M. Á., & Escobar, M. D. C. M. (2016) · Pharmaceutical Statistics · doi:10.1002/pst.1741 · Cited by 5
Sex as a prognostic factor for mortality in adults with acute symptomatic pulmonary embolism
López‐Alcalde, J., Stallings, E., Zamora, J., Muriel, A., van Doorn, S., Díaz, N. Á., Fernandez-Felix, B. M., Loaiza, C. A. Q., Perez, R., & Jiménez, D. (2021) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd013835 · Cited by 5
Brahim, L. O., Lambert, S., Feeley, N., Coumoundouros, C., Schaffler, J. L., McCusker, J., Moodie, E. E. M., Kayser, J. W., Kolne, K., Belzile, É., et al. (2021) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-228613/v1 · Cited by 5
Combining Results Using Meta‐Analysis
Deeks, J. J., Riley, R. D., & Higgins, J. P. T. (2022) · doi:10.1002/9781119099369.ch9 · Cited by 5
Huh, G., Choi, W., Lee, J. B., Vargo, J. J., Jang, S. N., Lee, T., Park, C. H., Edmundowicz, S. A., & Park, D. H. (2025) · Endoscopic Ultrasound · doi:10.1097/eus.0000000000000126 · Cited by 4
Evaluating the properties of the fragility index of meta-analyses
Xing, A., Xing, X., Murad, M. H., & Lin, L. (2025) · BMC Medical Research Methodology · doi:10.1186/s12874-025-02648-5 · Cited by 7
“Due to these properties, it is the default method in some popular meta-analytic software packages, such as RevMan [38].”
Meta‐Analysis of Cost‐Effectiveness
Bang, H., & Zhao, H. (2026) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.70352 · Cited by 4
“For instance, there are recommendations on how to choose FE versus RE in the literature (without full consensus), and RE is much more popular, almost as a norm [18, 30].”
Inference using an exact distribution of test statistic for random-effects meta-analysis
Hanada, K., & Sugimoto, T. (2022) · Annals of the Institute of Statistical Mathematics · doi:10.1007/s10463-022-00844-4 · Cited by 6
Maximos, M., Elsayed, S., Maxwell, C. J., Houle, S. K. D., Pelletier, R., McConnell, B. M., Pylypiak, A., & Gamble, J. (2024) · Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1186/s13643-024-02671-5 · Cited by 4
“A random-effects meta-analysis using the Knapp-Hartung approach [26] for pair-wise comparison to attain the average intervention effect of penicillin allergy delabeling effectiveness and safety by the proposed intervention will be performed.”
MethodBavishi, C., Trivedi, V., Sellke, F. W., Gordon, P. C., & Abbott, J. D. (2020) · The American Journal of Cardiology · doi:10.1016/j.amjcard.2020.11.023 · Cited by 4
Tipping point analysis for the between-arm correlation in an arm-based evidence synthesis
Han, W., Wang, Z., Xiao, M., He, Z., Chu, H., & Lin, L. (2024) · BMC Medical Research Methodology · doi:10.1186/s12874-024-02263-w · Cited by 4
“This issue has been illustrated by Cornell et al. [6], who demonstrated inconsistent pooled results using different estimation approaches on the same datasets.”
ResultMichos, E. D., Wilson, L. M., Yeh, H., Berger, Z. D., Suarez‐Cuervo, C., Stacy, S. R., & Bass, E. B. (2020) · Annals of Internal Medicine · Cited by 4
Kahale, L. A., Matar, C. F., Tsolakian, I. G., Hakoum, M. B., Barba, M., Yosuico, V. E. D., Terrenato, I., Sperati, F., Schünemann, H. J., & Akl, E. A. (2021) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd006466.pub7 · Cited by 5
Multivariate Mixed Model Analysis
Twisk, J. W. R. (2019) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108635660.011 · Cited by 4
Meta-analysis and the problem of inconsistent effects
Doi, S. A. R. (2015) · International Journal of Evidence-Based Healthcare · doi:10.1097/xeb.0000000000000058 · Cited by 4
Nikolic, M., Pezzoli, P., Jaworska, N., & Seto, M. C. (2022) · bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · doi:10.1101/2022.01.11.475895 · Cited by 4
“Meta-analytic methods including small-sample adjustments, profile likelihood, or hierarchical Bayesian models (Cornell et al., 2014) are recommended.”
MethodPrediction of atrial fibrillation after a stroke event: A systematic review with meta-analysis
Helbitz, A., Haris, M., Younsi, T., Romer, E., Ginks, W. R., Raveendra, K., Hayward, C., Shuweihdi, F., Larvin, H., Cameron, A., et al. (2025) · Heart Rhythm · doi:10.1016/j.hrthm.2025.01.026 · Cited by 3
Bai, H., Zhang, C., Zhao, A., Tang, W., & Zhang, L. (2025) · Therapeutic Advances in Hematology · doi:10.1177/20406207251319593 · Cited by 3
“12 This model was chosen due to the anticipated variability in treatment regimens across eligible studies.”
Explaining Differences between Groups
Twisk, J. W. R. (2019) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108635660.007 · Cited by 3
Examining hypoglycemia risk with systemic fluoroquinolone use: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Guo, I. J., Maximos, M., & Gamble, J. (2024) · CMI Communications · doi:10.1016/j.cmicom.2024.105038 · Cited by 4
Sex as a prognostic factor for mortality in adults with acute symptomatic pulmonary embolism
Tejero, E. J., López‐Alcalde, J., Correa-Pérez, A., Stallings, E., Gil, A. G., del Campo-Albendea, L., Mateos-Haro, M., Fernandez-Felix, B. M., Stallings, R., Díaz, N. Á., et al. (2025) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd013835.pub2 · Cited by 6
Zhao, Y., & Lin, L. (2021) · BioMedInformatics · doi:10.3390/biomedinformatics1020005 · Cited by 3
Appraising Between-Study Homogeneity, Small-Study Effects, Moderators, and Confounders
Veroniki, A. A., Huedo-Medina, T. B., & Fountoulakis, K. N. (2016) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-25655-9_12 · Cited by 3
Ji, D., Liu, Y., Han, X., Hu, S., & Zhao, Y. (2025) · Aesthetic Plastic Surgery · doi:10.1007/s00266-025-04724-z · Cited by 2
“As heterogeneity was high, random-effects models were used for data pooling [20].”
Tewari, J., Qidwai, K. A., Tewari, A., Rana, A., Tewari, V., Singh, V., Tiwari, R., Maheshwari, A., Verma, N., Jha, H., et al. (2025) · Journal of Human Hypertension · doi:10.1038/s41371-025-01011-x · Cited by 2
“The data was pooled using logarithm odds ratios using random-effects or fi xed-effects inverse-variance models [19].”
Cheng, M., Lin, L., Cao, X.-W., Tang, W., Xu, X., Zhang, X., Huang, Y., Tian, J., Xu, Z., & Cheng, W. (2025) · Global Transitions · doi:10.1016/j.glt.2025.06.002 · Cited by 2
Zhou, F., Zhao, L., Deng, Y., Guo, C., & Liu, L. (2025) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2024-097048 · Cited by 2
“23 If considerable heterogeneity is detected, subgroup analyses will be conducted based on the type of frailty assessment instrument used.”
Li, B., Chen, C., Zhou, X., Liu, H., Zhou, Z., Wang, X., Liang, J., Guo, Y., & Liang, S. (2026) · Aquaculture Reports · doi:10.1016/j.aqrep.2025.103356 · Cited by 2
Six Entrenched Misconceptions About Meta‐Analysis Models
Elmakaty, I., Abdulmajeed, J., Chivese, T., Khan, M. N., Stone, J., & Doi, S. A. R. (2026) · Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine · doi:10.1111/jebm.70120 · Cited by 3
“The choice of meta-analysis model matters and to illustrate this, an example given by Cornell et al. [ 37 ] regarding heterogeneous evidence from Collins and colleagues’ meta-analysis [ 66 ] of the effects of diuretics on preeclampsia is shown in Figure 4 .”
Sun, W., Cao, Y., Li, S.-M., Sun, L., & Liao, Y.-X. (2026) · Frontiers in Nutrition · doi:10.3389/fnut.2026.1764109 · Cited by 2
Bello, A. K., Lloyd, A. M., Osman, M. A., Kurzawa, J., Chambers, T., Habib, S., Olah, M. E., Habeeb, Z. M., Qarni, U., Shojai, S., et al. (2024) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2024-085329 · Cited by 3
“Patients and members of the public were not involved at any stage of the project.”
Twisk, J. W. R. (2019) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108635660.008 · Cited by 2
Roush, G. C., Perez, F., Abdelfattah, R. S., Prindle, A., Jean, E., Singh, T., Kostis, J. B., Kostis, W. J., Elliott, W. J., & Berlin, J. A. (2017) · Current Hypertension Reports · doi:10.1007/s11906-017-0765-7 · Cited by 2
“D-Lmodels give excess false positives when heterogeneity and fewer trials are present [27, 28].”
BackgroundCorrection: Ultrasonography Screening for Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms
Guirguis‐Blake, J., Beil, T. L., & Whitlock, E. P. (2016) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/l160010 · Cited by 2
DeLong, W. B., Polissar, N. L., Neradilek, M. B., & Laam, L. A. (2017) · World Neurosurgery · doi:10.1016/j.wneu.2016.09.047 · Cited by 2
Appropriateness of conducting and reporting random‐effects meta‐analysis in oncology
Ren, J., Ma, J., & Cappelleri, J. C. (2024) · Research Synthesis Methods · doi:10.1002/jrsm.1702 · Cited by 1
Evidence-Based Prescribing of Prazosin in Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder
Kennedy, K. P. (2025) · Current Treatment Options in Psychiatry · doi:10.1007/s40501-025-00353-0 · Cited by 2
“The use of random-effects analysis is designed to account for heterogeneity, but the statistical assumptions imply that small cross-over trials are nearly as precise as far larger trials, assumptions that warrant scrutiny (especially in meta-analyses with small numbers of studies) [23, 24].”
Kundu, P., Quinn, M., Thomas, E. D., Christensen, J. C., Toussi, S. S., Alami, N. N., & Banerjee, A. (2025) · EBioMedicine · doi:10.1016/j.ebiom.2025.105765 · Cited by 1
“By conducting meta-analysis 11,12 a widely popular statistical approach for combining studies, we seek to synthesise the available evidence, elucidate RSV VL kinetics and characterise the effectiveness of various interventions for RSV based on data from the HICs.”
Bayesian statistics: a primer for perioperative medicine clinicians
Mazzinari, G., Zampieri, F. G., Harhay, M. O., Schultz, M. J., van Meenen, D. M. P., & Neto, A. S. (2026) · Perioperative Medicine · doi:10.1186/s13741-026-00659-4 · Cited by 1
“Also, Bayesian models supply a robust framework compared to the standard meta-analytic methods, which can have issues in accurately estimating confidence intervals and have rigid assumptions about the studies’ heterogeneity (Cornell et al., 2014).”
Khan, A., Shuangjie, L., Xiaoqing, A., Shahzad, M. F., & Razzaq, A. (2026) · Letters in Spatial and Resource Sciences · doi:10.1007/s12076-026-00431-8 · Cited by 1
Herpes simplex virus 2 and dementia risk: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Hunt, C. J., Zabriskie, B. N., Coulter, E. J., McClellan, M. C., Templeton, G., Erbstoesser, R., MacLean, S., Miller, C. H., Moss, J., Carter, C., et al. (2026) · Frontiers in Dementia · doi:10.3389/frdem.2026.1737068 · Cited by 1
Makena, W., Nwankwo, M., Idris, A., Dangoji, D. P., Ogbe, A. E., Ayuba, J. T., Aja, P. M., & Etukudo, E. M. (2026) · Phytomedicine Plus · doi:10.1016/j.phyplu.2026.101019 · Cited by 1
Twisk, J. W. R. (2019) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108635660.013 · Cited by 1
Jiang, H. X., & Iftikhar, H. B. (2018) · Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine · doi:10.26502/fccm.92920043
“According to the publication of JUPITER study justify the current issue of statin drugs use in the emergence of extreme cases reinforcing the acute myocardial infarction subjects on the premise of LDL, HDL, TG, BMI, and FPG prospecting the concept of less vulnerability and efficacies conflict the absolute risk of plac…”
BackgroundMeta-Analysis on Individual Participant Data
Twisk, J. W. R. (2019) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108635660.012 · Cited by 1
Triangulating Truth and Reaching Consensus on Population Size, Prevalence, and More: Modeling Study
Fellows, I. E., Corcoran, C., & McIntyre, A. F. (2023) · JMIR Public Health and Surveillance · doi:10.2196/48738 · Cited by 1
“…potential to underestimate the true value of tau squared [26] and produces confidence (or credible) intervals that are overly narrow, particularly when the number of estimates is small or the true between-study variance is large [27], both of which are frequently encountered when dealing with PSE.”
BackgroundMethodOrtiz, S. O., Veroniki, A.-A., Villatoro-Rodríguez, S. N., de Gracia, S. G., Mercado-Lara, M. F., Yepes-Núñez, J. J., & Flórez, I. D. (2024) · F1000Research · doi:10.12688/f1000research.146684.1
Random-Effects Meta-analysis of Inconsistent Effects
Lander, D. H. (2014) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/l14-5017-7 · Cited by 1
Random-Effects Meta-analysis of Inconsistent Effects
Keum, N., Hsieh, C.-C., & Cook, N. R. (2014) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/l14-5017-8 · Cited by 1
Noninvasive Ventilation and Weaning Outcome
Burns, K. E. A., & Adhikari, N. K. J. (2016) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-04259-6_55 · Cited by 1
Meta-analysis of Opioids for Chronic Pain
Hoaglin, D. C. (2019) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2019.2181 · Cited by 1
Jiesisibieke, Z. L., Zhang, S., Chien, C.-W., & Tung, T. (2020) · Renal Failure · doi:10.1080/0886022x.2020.1776733 · Cited by 1
Mixed Model Analysis with Different Outcome Variables
Twisk, J. W. R. (2019) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108635660.006 · Cited by 1
LaBan, M. M., & Ferris, J. A. (2014) · American Journal of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation · doi:10.1097/phm.0000000000000160 · Cited by 1
Hoaglin, D. C. (2017) · Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology · doi:10.1016/j.cgh.2017.03.034 · Cited by 1
Gao, G., Guan, A., Li, G., & Yu, G. (2024) · Liver International · doi:10.1111/liv.16118 · Cited by 1
Assessment of Heterogeneity in Meta-analyses—Reply
Dechartres, A., Trinquart, L., & Ravaud, P. (2014) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2014.14349
Asymmetry and other distributional properties in medical research data
Partlett, C. (2015) · Cited by 1
Early tracheostomy in critically ill patients: still too fast
King-Holmes, J. (2015)
Cereda, E., Veronese, E., Solmi, M., Fowler, S. A., Manzato, E., Maggi, S., Manu, P., Abe, E., Hayashi, K., Allard, J. P., et al. (2016) · Nutrition · doi:10.1016/j.nut.2015.12.006
Wong, B. C., Muneer, M., Wiebe, N., Storie, D., Shurraw, S., Pannu, N., Klarenbach, S. W., Grudzinski, A. L., NESRALLAH, G. E., & Pauly, R. P. (2014)
Guidelines for Integration of Systematic Reviews using Primary Studies
Botelho, R. V., & de Oliveira, M. F. (2016) · Arquivos Brasileiros de Neurocirurgia Brazilian Neurosurgery · doi:10.1055/s-0036-1583528
Original Investigation Tonsillectomy for IgA Nephropathy: A Meta-analysis
Liu, L., Wang, L., Jiang, Y., Li, Y., Dong, L., Li, Z., & Li, X. (2015)
Howse, P. M., Chibrikova, L., Twells, L., Barrett, B. J., & Gamble, J. (2016)
Shih, A. W. Y., & Heddle, N. M. (2017) · doi:10.1002/9781119129431.ch47
Zhang, L., Yang, J., Eastwood, G. M., Zhu, G., Tanaka, A., & Bellomo, R. (2015)
Hoaglin, D. C. (2018) · Journal of Pain · doi:10.1016/j.jpain.2017.09.011
Schmid, C. H. (2018) · Biometrical Journal · doi:10.1002/bimj.201800192
Hoaglin, D. C. (2018) · Biometrical Journal · doi:10.1002/bimj.201800188
Hoaglin, D. C. (2019) · CHANCE · doi:10.1080/09332480.2019.1606590
Ponce, M. F. (2018) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.3164259
Yeh, J., Lo, G., Huang, R., Lin, C., & Wang, W. (2019) · doi:10.21203/rs.2.18872/v1
Basic Principles of Mixed Model Analysis
Twisk, J. W. R. (2019) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108635660.003
Metadata
- Authors
- Cornell, J. E., Mulrow, C. D., Localio, R., Stack, C. B., Meibohm, A. R., Guallar, E., & Goodman, S. N.
- Affiliations
- Johns Hopkins University (US)
- From University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, Texas; University of Pennsylvania and American College of Physicians, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Johns Hopkins School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland; and Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California.
- Venue
- Annals of Internal Medicine
- Publisher
- American College of Physicians
- Published
- 2014-02-18
- Volume
- 160
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 267-270
- ISSN
- 0003-4819 (ISSN-L)
- 1539-3704
- OpenAlex
- W2129670822
- Cited by
- 453
- References
- 28
- Citations by year
- 2026: 17 · 2025: 34 · 2024: 30 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 26 · 2021: 54 · 2020: 34 · 2019: 58 · 2018: 42 · 2017: 41 · 2016: 51 · 2015: 28 · 2014: 20
- FWCI
- 12.77
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Annals of Internal Medicine (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Epidemiology
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Delphi Technique in Research
- Keywords
- random-effects meta-analysis, heterogeneity, treatment effect estimation, confidence limits, critical synthesis
- MeSH terms
- Data Interpretation, Statistical, Software, Meta-Analysis as Topic, Confidence Intervals
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