Calculation Errors in Meta-Analysis
Authors: Andrea Messori
Journal: Annals of Internal Medicine (1993)

Letters1 January 1993Calculation Errors in Meta-AnalysisAndrea Messori, PharmD, Giovanna Scroccaro, PharmD, and Nello Martini, PharmDAndrea Messori, PharmDHospital Pharmacy; Ospedale Policlinico Borgo Roma; Verona, ItalySearch for more papers by this author, Giovanna Scroccaro, PharmDHospital Pharmacy; Ospedale Policlinico Borgo Roma; Verona, ItalySearch for more papers by this author, and Nello Martini, PharmDHospital Pharmacy; Ospedale Policlinico Borgo Roma; Verona, ItalySearch for more papers by this authorAuthor, Article, and Disclosure Informationhttps://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-118-1-199301010-00022 SectionsAboutFull TextPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissions ShareFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail TO THE EDITOR:Meta-analysis is increasingly being used in clinical research to address controversial issues where data from clinical trials are inconclusive [1, 2].The Mantel-Haenszel test [3, 4], the most commonly used statistical technique for determining the overall odds ratio (or relative risk) of a meta-analysis, is calculated by pooling appropriately the individual odds ratios in published studies. Logistic regression [4] can also be used even though the technique is considerably more complex.The recent paper by Hommes and colleagues [5] reports a meta-analysis of six randomized trials comparing subcutaneous heparin with continuous intravenous heparin for the initial treatment ...References1. Sacks HS, Berrier J, Reitman D, Ancona-Berk VA, Chalmers TC. Meta-analyses of randomized, controlled trials. N Engl J Med. 1987; 316:450-5. Google Scholar2. Lau J, Antman EM, Jimenez-Silva J, Kupelink B, Mosteller SF, Chalmers TC. Cumulative meta-analysis of therapeutic trials for myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med. 1992; 327:248-54. Google Scholar3. Mantel N, Haenszel W. Statistical aspects of the analysis of data from retrospective studies of disease. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1959; 22:719-48. Google Scholar4. Schlesselman JJ. Basic methods of analysis. In: Schlesselman JJ; ed. Case-Control Studies. Design, Conduct, Analysis. New York: Oxford University Press; 1982:171-226. Google Scholar5. Hommes DW, Bura A, Mazzolai L, Bueller HR, tenCate JW. Subcutaneous heparin compared with continuous intravenous heparin administration in the initial treatment of deep vein thrombosis. Ann Intern Med. 1992; 116:279-84. Google Scholar Author, Article, and Disclosure InformationAffiliations: Hospital Pharmacy; Ospedale Policlinico Borgo Roma; Verona, Italy PreviousarticleNextarticle Advertisement FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Metrics Cited byStatistical Significance and the Dichotomization of EvidenceStatistical controversies in clinical research: overlap and errors in the meta-analyses of microRNA genetic association studies in cancersBlinding Us to the Obvious? The Effect of Statistical Training on the Evaluation of EvidenceThe antidepressant tale: figures signifying nothing?(Unlearned) lessons from John Graunt and Kenneth Rothman: A “CLASSic” exampleMeta-Analysis of Some Results of Clinical Trials on Sulodexide Therapy in Peripheral Occlusive Arterial DiseaseLessons from John Graunt 1 January 1993Volume 118, Issue 1Page: 77-78KeywordsClinical trialsDeep vein thrombosisHeparinOdds ratioRandomized trialsRelative riskSoftware tools Issue Published: 1 January 1993 Copyright & PermissionsCopyright © 1993 by American College of Physicians. All Rights Reserved.PDF downloadLoading ...