ArticleStatistics in medicine2021
Meta-analysis methods for multiple related markers: Applications to microbiome studies with the results on multiple α-diversity indices.
Article in Statistics in medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Role of the Gut Microbiota in the Development and Progression of Major Depressive and Bipolar Disorder.Nutrients · 2021Pooled it
- A multi-bin rarefying method for evaluating alpha diversities in TCR sequencing data.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2024Article
- Microbiota Characterization of the Cow Mammary Gland Microenvironment and Its Association with Somatic Cell Count.Veterinary sciences · 2023Article
- A rarefaction-without-resampling extension of PERMANOVA for testing presence-absence associations in the microbiome.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Meta-analysis is a practical and powerful analytic tool that enables a unified statistical inference across the results from multiple studies. Notably, researchers often report the results on multiple related markers in each study (eg, various α-diversity indices in microbiome studies). However, univariate meta-analyses are limited to combining the results on a single common marker at a time, whereas existing multivariate meta-analyses are limited to the situations where marker-by-marker correlations are given in each study. Thus, here we introduce two meta-analysis methods, multi-marker meta-analysis (mMeta) and adaptive multi-marker meta-analysis (aMeta), to combine multiple studies throughout multiple related markers with no priori results on marker-by-marker correlations. mMeta is a statistical estimator for a pooled estimate and its SE across all the studies and markers, whereas aMeta is a statistical test based on the test statistic of the minimum P-value among marker-specific meta-analyses. mMeta conducts both effect estimation and hypothesis testing based on a weighted average of marker-specific pooled estimates while estimating marker-by-marker correlations non-parametrically via permutations, yet its power is only moderate. In contrast, aMeta closely approaches the highest power among marker-specific meta-analyses, yet it is limited to hypothesis testing. While their applications can be broader, we illustrate the use of mMeta and aMeta to combine microbiome studies throughout multiple α-diversity indices. We evaluate mMeta and aMeta in silico and apply them to real microbiome studies on the disparity in α-diversity by the status of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection. The R package for mMeta and aMeta is freely available at https://github.com/hk1785/mMeta.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.