Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34939249›Full record

SynthesisClinical and experimental allergy : journal of the British Society for Allergy and Clinical Immunology2022

Individual participant data meta-analysis versus aggregate data meta-analysis: A case study in eczema and food allergy prevention.

Eleanor Van Vogt, Suzie Cro, Victoria R Cornelius, Hywel C Williams, Lisa M Askie, Rachel Phillips, Maeve M Kelleher, Robert J Boyle

Open access · hybridAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Clinical and experimental allergy : journal of the British Society for Allergy and Clinical Immunology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 17% of its field
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, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Topical Anti-Inflammatory Treatments for Eczema: A Cochrane Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.Clinical and experimental allergy : journal of the British Society for Allergy and Clinical Immunology · 2024
    Pooled it
  3. Individual participant data meta-analysis versus aggregate data meta-analysis: A case study in eczema and food allergy prevention.Clinical and experimental allergy : journal of the British Society for Allergy and Clinical Immunology · 2022
    Pooled it
  4. Emollient application from birth to prevent eczema in high-risk children: the BEEP RCT.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2024
    Trial
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Eleanor Van VogtImperial Clinical Trials Unit, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Suzie CroImperial Clinical Trials Unit, Imperial College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-6113-1173
Victoria R CorneliusImperial Clinical Trials Unit, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Hywel C WilliamsCentre of Evidence Based Dermatology, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Lisa M AskieNHMRC Clinical Trials Centre, University of Sydney, Camperdown, New South Wales, Australia.
Rachel PhillipsImperial Clinical Trials Unit, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Maeve M KelleherNational Heart and Lung Institute, Section of Inflammation and Repair, Imperial College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-3764-0461
Robert J BoyleCentre of Evidence Based Dermatology, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Imperial College London · GBUniversity of Nottingham · GBLung Institute · USThe University of Sydney · AU

Funding

Department of Health NIHR 300593
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionMeta-analysis traditionally uses aggregate data from published reports. Individual Participant Data (IPD) meta-analysis, which obtains and synthesizes participant-level data, is potentially more informative, but resource-intensive. The impact on the findings of meta-analyses using IPD in comparison with aggregate data has rarely been formally evaluated.

methodsWe conducted a secondary analysis of a Cochrane systematic review of skincare interventions for preventing eczema and food allergy in infants to identify the impact of the analytical choice on the review's findings. We used aggregate data meta-analysis only and contrasted the results against those of the originally published IPD meta-analysis. All meta-analysis used random effects inverse variance models. Certainty of evidence was evaluated using GRADE.

resultsThe pooled treatment effects for the Cochrane systematic review's co-primary outcomes of eczema and food allergy were similar in IPD meta-analysis (eczema RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.81, 1.31; I

conclusionsFor this systematic review, IPD did not significantly change primary outcome risk ratios compared with aggregate data meta-analysis. However, certainty of evidence, safety outcomes, subgroup and adherence analyses were significantly different using IPD. This demonstrates benefits of adopting an IPD approach to meta-analysis.

Indexed as

EczemaFood HypersensitivityHumansInfantatopic dermatitisfood allergyindividual participant data Introductionmeta-analysisprevention

Identifiers

PMID34939249
PMCPMC9302682
OpenAlexW4200404634

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.