SynthesisStatistics in medicine2023
Bayesian estimation and testing in random-effects meta-analysis of rare binary events allowing for flexible group variability.
Synthesis in Statistics in medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Age matters in pediatric pain care: Bayesian meta-reanalysis of virtual reality trials.Pediatric research · 2026Pooled it
- Performance assessment of Bayesian meta-analytic predictive model on kdr mutation in insecticide-resistant malarial vectors in sub-Saharan Africa.Malaria journal · 2025Pooled it
- Goodness-of-fit testing for meta-analysis of rare binary events.Scientific reports · 2023Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
Rare binary events data arise frequently in medical research. Due to lack of statistical power in individual studies involving such data, meta-analysis has become an increasingly important tool for combining results from multiple independent studies. However, traditional meta-analysis methods often report severely biased estimates in such rare-event settings. Moreover, many rely on models assuming a pre-specified direction for variability between control and treatment groups for mathematical convenience, which may be violated in practice. Based on a flexible random-effects model that removes the assumption about the direction, we propose new Bayesian procedures for estimating and testing the overall treatment effect and inter-study heterogeneity. Our Markov chain Monte Carlo algorithm employs Pólya-Gamma augmentation so that all conditionals are known distributions, greatly facilitating computational efficiency. Our simulation shows that the proposed approach generally reports less biased and more stable estimates compared to existing methods. We further illustrate our approach using two real examples, one using rosiglitazone data from 56 studies and the other using stomach ulcers data from 41 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.