Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20830507›Full record

SynthesisEuropean journal of epidemiology2010

A systematic review evaluating the methodological aspects of meta-analyses of genetic association studies in cancer research.

Stefania Boccia, Emma De Feo, Paola Gallì, Francesco Gianfagna, Rosarita Amore, Gualtiero Ricciardi

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in European journal of epidemiology, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 11 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 11 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed, 11 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Cyclooxygenase-2 polymorphisms were associated with the risk of gastric cancer: evidence from a meta-analysis based on case-control studies.Tumour biology : the journal of the International Society for Oncodevelopmental Biology and Medicine · 2013
    Pooled it
  10. Meta-analysis of adiponectin polymorphisms and colorectal cancer risk.International journal of medical sciences · 2013
    Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Medeniyet medical journal · 2026
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Lack of association between CD14-159 C/T polymorphism and acute pancreatitis: a meta-analysis.International journal of clinical and experimental medicine · 2015
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Stefania BocciaInstitute of Hygiene, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy. sboccia@rm.unicatt.it
Emma De Feo
Paola Gallì
Francesco Gianfagna
Rosarita Amore
Gualtiero Ricciardi

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Meta-analyses and Individual Patient Data (IPD) meta-analyses of genetic association studies are a powerful tool to summarize the scientific evidences, however their application present considerable potential and several pitfalls. We reviewed systematically all published meta-analyses and IPD meta-analyses of genetic association studies in the field of cancer research, searching for relevant studies on the Medline, Embase, and HuGE Reviews Archive databases until January 2009. The association between selected predictors of methodological quality and the year of publication was also evaluated. 144 meta-analyses involving 299 gene-disease associations, and 25 IPD meta-analyses on 83 gene-disease were included. Overall quality of the reports showed a substantial improvement over time, as authors have become more inclusive of primary papers published in all languages since 2005 (P-value = 0.087), as well as statistical heterogeneity and publication bias were evaluated more systematically. Only 35.4% of the meta-analyses, however, adopted a comprehensive bibliographic search strategy to identify the primary reports, 63.9% did not specify the language of the included studies, 39.8% did not test for Hardy-Weinberg Equilibrium (HWE), while 62.2 and 75.9% of the meta-analyses and IPD meta-analyses, respectively, did not declare the scientific rationale for the genetic model chosen. Additionally, the HWE assessment showed a substantial decreasing trend over time (P-value = 0.031) while publication bias was more often evaluated when statistical heterogeneity was actually present (P-value = 0.007). Although we showed a general methodological improvement over time, guidelines on conducting and reporting meta-analyses of genetic association studies are needed to enhance their methodological quality.

Indexed as

Biomedical ResearchMeta-Analysis as TopicMolecular EpidemiologyNeoplasmsGenetic Association StudiesHumansPublication Bias

Identifiers

PMID20830507

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.