Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33864652›Full record

SynthesisResearch synthesis methods2021

Estimating the reference interval from a fixed effects meta-analysis.

Wenhao Cao, Lianne Siegel, Jincheng Zhou, Motao Zhu, Tiejun Tong, Yong Chen, Haitao Chu

Abstract readMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Research synthesis methods, 2021. 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. Personality domains in early stages of psychosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.European archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Individualised total knee arthroplasty demonstrates 99.4% survival at 3 to 5 years.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2026
    Observational
  4. Article
  5. 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

7 authors.

Wenhao CaoDivision of Biostatistics, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9213-3705
Jincheng ZhouCenter for Design & Analysis, Amgen Inc., Thousand Oaks, California, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2641-2495
Motao ZhuThe Center for Injury Research and Policy, Abigail Wexner Research Institute at Nationwide Children's Hospital, Columbus, Ohio, USA.
Tiejun TongDepartment of Mathematics, Hong Kong Baptist University, Kowloon Tong, Hong Kong.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0947-3990
Yong ChenDepartment of Biostatistics, Epidemiology and Informatics, The Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
Haitao ChuDivision of Biostatistics, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0932-598X

Funding

University of Minnesota Clinical and Translational Science Institute (UMN CTSI)UL1TR002494 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA · PI BLAZAR, BRUCE R, WEISDORF, DANIEL J · 2018 to 2022
$34.9M
Statistical Methods and Software for Multivariate Meta-analysisR01LM012982 · NLM · UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA · PI LIN, LIFENG, SIEGEL, LIANNE · 2019 to 2022
$1.3M
Training in Biostatistics for Heart, Lung and Blood Disease ResearchT32HL129956 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA · PI NEATON, JAMES DENNIS · 2016 to 2020
$1.1M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR002494NHLBI NIH HHS T32 HL129956NHLBI NIH HHS T32HL129956NLM NIH HHS R01 LM012982U.S. National Institutes of Health's National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences UL1TR002494U.S. National Library of Medicine R01LM012982
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A reference interval provides a basis for physicians to determine whether a measurement is typical of a healthy individual. It can be interpreted as a prediction interval for a new individual from the overall population. However, a reference interval based on a single study may not be representative of the broader population. Meta-analysis can provide a general reference interval based on the overall population by combining results from multiple studies. Methods for estimating the reference interval from a random effects meta-analysis have been recently proposed to incorporate the within and between-study variation, but a random effects model may give imprecise estimates of the between-study variation with only few studies. In addition, the normal distribution of underlying study-specific means, and equal within-study variance assumption in these methods may be inappropriate in some settings. In this article, we aim to estimate the reference interval based on the fixed effects model assuming study effects are unrelated, which is useful for a meta-analysis with only a few studies (e.g., ≤5). We propose a mixture distribution method only assuming parametric distributions (e.g., normal) for individuals within each study and integrating them to form the overall population distribution. This method is compared to an empirical method only assuming a parametric overall population distribution. Simulation studies have shown that both methods can estimate a reference interval with coverage close to the targeted value (i.e., 95%). Meta-analyses of women daytime urination frequency and frontal subjective postural vertical measurements are reanalyzed to demonstrate the application of our methods.

Indexed as

Models, StatisticalResearch DesignComputer SimulationFemaleHumansNormal DistributionReference Valuesfixed effects modelmeta-analysisreference intervalvery few studies

Identifiers

PMID33864652
PMCPMC8924903

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.