Imputing missing standard deviations in meta-analyses can provide accurate results
Imputing missing standard deviations in meta-analyses can provide accurate results
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.jclinepi.2005.06.006
复制
发表时间：
2006-01-01
影响因子：
7.2
通讯作者：
Watanabe, N
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Furukawa, TA;Barbui, C;Watanabe, N
背景和目的：许多随机对照试验(RCT)的报道未能提供其连续结果测量的标准差(SD)。一些元分析师用其他研究中报告的数据来替代它们，这些研究要么来自另一个元分析，要么来自同一个元分析中的其他研究。方法：在两个抗抑郁药的Meta分析中，我们将单个RCT的实际标准化均数差值(SMD)和所有RCT的Meta分析合并的SMD与基于上述两种归因方法的结果进行了比较。结果：两个Meta分析包括39个氟西汀RCT(n=3,681)和25个阿米替林RCT(n=1,832)，它们实际报告了汉密尔顿抑郁量表的平均值和SDS。根据所提出的两种推算方法中的任何一种，RCT的实际SMD与推算的SMD之间的一致性很好，ANOVA组内相关系数在0.61到0.97之间。实际合并的SMD和推定的SMD之间的一致性甚至更好，他们的点估计和95%可信区间的差异都很小。结论：对于一些已识别的试验没有报告SDS的系统评价，借用其他研究的SDS似乎是安全的。(C)2006 Elsevier Inc.保留所有权利。
Background and Objectives: Many reports of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) fail to provide standard deviations (SDs) of their continuous outcome measures. Some meta-analysts substitute them by those reported in other studies, either from another meta-analysis or from other studies in the same meta-analysis. But the validity of such practices has never been empirically examined.Methods: We compared the actual standardized mean difference (SMD) of individual RCTs and the meta-analytically pooled SMD of all RCTs against those based on the above-mentioned two imputation methods in two meta-analyses of antidepressants.Results: Two meta-analyses included 39 RCTs of fluoxetine (n = 3,681) and 25 RCTs of amitriptyline (n = 1,832), which had actually reported means and SDs of the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression. According to either of the two proposed imputation methods, the agreement between actual SMDs and imputed SMDs for individual RCTs was very good with ANOVA intraclass correlation coefficients between 0.61 and 0.97. The agreement between the actual pooled SMD and the imputed one was even better, with minimal differences in both their point estimates and 95% confidence intervals.Conclusion: For a systematic review where some of the identified trials do not report SDs, it appears safe to borrow SDs from other studies. (c) 2006 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.