Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26303591›Full record

ArticleStatistics in medicine2016

Meta-analysis of studies with bivariate binary outcomes: a marginal beta-binomial model approach.

Yong Chen, Chuan Hong, Yang Ning, Xiao Su

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Statistics in medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Yong ChenDepartment of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, 19104, Pennsylvania, U.S.A.
Chuan HongDivision of Biostatistics, University of Texas School of Public Health, 1200 Pressler St, Houston, 77030, Texas, U.S.A.
Yang NingDepartment of Operations Research and Financial Engineering, Princeton University, Princeton, 08544, New Jersey, U.S.A.
Xiao SuDivision of Biostatistics, University of Texas School of Public Health, 1200 Pressler St, Houston, 77030, Texas, U.S.A.

Funding

Multivariate Meta-anaylsis of Diagnostic TestsR03HS022900 · AHRQ · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS HLTH SCI CTR HOUSTON · PI CHEN, YONG · 2014 to 2015
$100k
AHRQ HHS R03 HS022900AHRQ HHS R03HS022900
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

When conducting a meta-analysis of studies with bivariate binary outcomes, challenges arise when the within-study correlation and between-study heterogeneity should be taken into account. In this paper, we propose a marginal beta-binomial model for the meta-analysis of studies with binary outcomes. This model is based on the composite likelihood approach and has several attractive features compared with the existing models such as bivariate generalized linear mixed model (Chu and Cole, 2006) and Sarmanov beta-binomial model (Chen et al., 2012). The advantages of the proposed marginal model include modeling the probabilities in the original scale, not requiring any transformation of probabilities or any link function, having closed-form expression of likelihood function, and no constraints on the correlation parameter. More importantly, because the marginal beta-binomial model is only based on the marginal distributions, it does not suffer from potential misspecification of the joint distribution of bivariate study-specific probabilities. Such misspecification is difficult to detect and can lead to biased inference using currents methods. We compare the performance of the marginal beta-binomial model with the bivariate generalized linear mixed model and the Sarmanov beta-binomial model by simulation studies. Interestingly, the results show that the marginal beta-binomial model performs better than the Sarmanov beta-binomial model, whether or not the true model is Sarmanov beta-binomial, and the marginal beta-binomial model is more robust than the bivariate generalized linear mixed model under model misspecifications. Two meta-analyses of diagnostic accuracy studies and a meta-analysis of case-control studies are conducted for illustration.

Indexed as

Meta-Analysis as TopicModels, StatisticalArylamine N-AcetyltransferaseBiasBiomarkers, TumorBiostatisticsCase-Control StudiesColorectal NeoplasmsComputer SimulationEarly DiagnosisHumansLikelihood FunctionsLinear ModelsMelanomaSoftwareUrinary Bladder NeoplasmsArylamine N-AcetyltransferaseBiomarkers, TumorNAT2 protein, humanbivariate beta-binomial modelcomposite likelihoodmarginal modelmeta-analysisSarmanov family

Identifiers

PMID26303591
PMCPMC5789784

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.