ArticleEnvironment international2022
How to report E-values for meta-analyses: Recommended improvements and additions to the new GRADE approach.
Article in Environment international, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Systematic Literature Review and Meta-Analysis of INSTI-Based Antiretroviral Therapy Single- Versus Multiple-Tablet Regimens for the Treatment of HIV.Advances in therapy · 2026Pooled it
- Article
- Comment on "Maternal and Pediatric Use of Vaccines for Mpox: A Living Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Safety and Effectiveness".Drug safety · 2026Article
- Independent and combined relationships between nighttime light exposure, air pollution, PMBMC public health · 2025Article
- Pregnancy Outcomes in Living Kidney Donors: Protocol of a Population-Based Cohort Study in Three Canadian Provinces.Canadian journal of kidney health and disease · 2024Article
- The M-Value: A Simple Sensitivity Analysis for Bias Due to Missing Data in Treatment Effect Estimates.American journal of epidemiology · 2023Article
- E-values for effect heterogeneity and approximations for causal interaction.International journal of epidemiology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Comment on
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In a recent concept paper (Verbeek et al., 2021), the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) Working Group provides a preliminary proposal to improve its existing guidelines for assessing sensitivity to uncontrolled confounding in meta-analyses of nonrandomized studies. The new proposal centers on reporting the E-value for the meta-analytic mean and on comparing this E-value to a measured "reference confounder" to determine whether residual uncontrolled confounding in the meta-analyzed studies could or could not plausibly explain away the meta-analytic mean. Although we agree that E-value analogs for meta-analyses could be an informative addition to future GRADE guidelines, we suggest improvements to the Verbeek et al. (2021)'s specific proposal regarding: (1) their interpretation of comparisons between the E-value and the strengths of associations of a reference confounder; (2) their characterization of evidence strength in meta-analyses in terms of only the meta-analytic mean; and (3) the possibility of confounding bias that is heterogeneous across studies.
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.