Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30511514›Full record

ArticleResearch synthesis methods2019

A flexible approach to identify interaction effects between moderators in meta-analysis.

Xinru Li, Elise Dusseldorp, Jacqueline J Meulman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Research synthesis methods, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 4 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
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

3 authors.

Xinru LiMathematical Institute, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6859-2311
Elise DusseldorpInstitute of Psychology, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Jacqueline J MeulmanMathematical Institute, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In meta-analytic studies, there are often multiple moderators available (eg, study characteristics). In such cases, traditional meta-analysis methods often lack sufficient power to investigate interaction effects between moderators, especially high-order interactions. To overcome this problem, meta-CART was proposed: an approach that applies classification and regression trees (CART) to identify interactions, and then subgroup meta-analysis to test the significance of moderator effects. The aim of this study is to improve meta-CART upon two aspects: 1) to integrate the two steps of the approach into one and 2) to consistently take into account the fixed-effect or random-effects assumption in both the the interaction identification and testing process. For fixed effect meta-CART, weights are applied, and subgroup analysis is adapted. For random effects meta-CART, a new algorithm has been developed. The performance of the improved meta-CART was investigated via an extensive simulation study on different types of moderator variables (ie, dichotomous, nominal, ordinal, and continuous variables). The simulation results revealed that the new method can achieve satisfactory performance (power greater than 0.80 and Type I error less than 0.05) if appropriate pruning rule is applied and the number of studies is large enough. The required minimum number of studies ranges from 40 to 120 depending on the complexity and strength of the interaction effects, the within-study sample size, the type of moderators, and the residual heterogeneity.

Indexed as

Effect Modifier, EpidemiologicMeta-Analysis as TopicResearch DesignAlgorithmsComputer SimulationData Interpretation, StatisticalHumansModels, StatisticalMonte Carlo MethodRegression AnalysisSample SizeCARTfixed effectinteraction between moderatorsmeta-analysisrandom effects

Identifiers

PMID30511514
PMCPMC6590644

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.