ArticleBMC medical research methodology2024
Re-expressing coefficients from regression models for inclusion in a meta-analysis.
Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 4 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Birth weight in relation to maternal and neonatal biomarker concentration of perfluorooctane sulfonic acid: a meta-analysis and meta-regression from a systematic review.Journal of exposure science & environmental epidemiology · 2025Pooled it
- Relationship of prenatal methylmercury exposure and language/verbal function: a meta-analysis.Environmental health : a global access science source · 2025Pooled it
- Systematic review and meta-analysis of birth weight and perfluorohexane sulfonate exposures: examination of sample timing and study confidence.Occupational and environmental medicine · 2024Pooled it
- Systematic review and meta-analysis of birth weight and PFNA exposures.Environmental research · 2023Pooled it
- The importance of considering variability in re-expression of effect estimates for use in meta-analyses.BMC medical research methodology · 2025Article
- Which prenatal biomarker is most appropriate for methylmercury dose-response for neurodevelopmental effects?Journal of toxicology and environmental health. Part B, Critical reviews · 2025Review
- A Perspective from US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Scientists: How Your Epidemiologic Analyses Can Inform the Human Health Risk Assessment Process.Environmental health perspectives · 2025Article
- Gestational diabetes mellitus in relation to serum per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances: A scoping review to evaluate the need for a new systematic review.F1000Research · 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Meta-analysis poses a challenge when original study results have been expressed in a non-uniform manner, such as when regression results from some original studies were based on a log-transformed key independent variable while in others no transformation was used. Methods of re-expressing regression coefficients to generate comparable results across studies regardless of data transformation have recently been developed. We examined the relative bias of three re-expression methods using simulations and 15 real data examples where the independent variable had a skewed distribution. Regression coefficients from models with log-transformed independent variables were re-expressed as though they were based on an untransformed variable. We compared the re-expressed coefficients to those from a model fit to the untransformed variable. In the simulated and real data, all three re-expression methods usually gave biased results, and the skewness of the independent variable predicted the amount of bias. How best to synthesize the results of the log-transformed and absolute exposure evidence streams remains an open question and may depend on the scientific discipline, scale of the outcome, and other considerations.
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.