Apparently conclusive meta-analyses may be inconclusive--Trial sequential analysis adjustment of random error risk due to repetitive testing of accumulating data in apparently conclusive neonatal meta-analyses

Jesper Brok; Kristian Thorlund; Jørn Wetterslev; Christian Gluud

doi:10.1093/ije/dyn188

Apparently conclusive meta-analyses may be inconclusive--Trial sequential analysis adjustment of random error risk due to repetitive testing of accumulating data in apparently conclusive neonatal meta-analyses

Jesper Brok, Kristian Thorlund, Jørn Wetterslev, Christian Gluud

581 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Random error may cause misleading evidence in meta-analyses. The required number of participants in a meta-analysis (i.e. information size) should be at least as large as an adequately powered single trial. Trial sequential analysis (TSA) may reduce risk of random errors due to repetitive testing of accumulating data by evaluating meta-analyses not reaching the information size with monitoring boundaries. This is analogous to sequential monitoring boundaries in a single trial. METHODS: We selected apparently conclusive (P

Original language	English
Journal	International Journal of Epidemiology
Volume	38
Issue number	1
Pages (from-to)	287-98
Number of pages	11
ISSN	0300-5771
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/dyn188
Publication status	Published - 2008

Access to Document

10.1093/ije/dyn188

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Apparently conclusive meta-analyses may be inconclusive--Trial sequential analysis adjustment of random error risk due to repetitive testing of accumulating data in apparently conclusive neonatal meta-analyses'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this

Apparently conclusive meta-analyses may be inconclusive--Trial sequential analysis adjustment of random error risk due to repetitive testing of accumulating data in apparently conclusive neonatal meta-analyses. / Brok, Jesper; Thorlund, Kristian; Wetterslev, Jørn et al.

In: International Journal of Epidemiology, Vol. 38, No. 1, 2008, p. 287-98.

Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review

@article{90823c00333d11df8ed1000ea68e967b,

title = "Apparently conclusive meta-analyses may be inconclusive--Trial sequential analysis adjustment of random error risk due to repetitive testing of accumulating data in apparently conclusive neonatal meta-analyses",

abstract = "BACKGROUND: Random error may cause misleading evidence in meta-analyses. The required number of participants in a meta-analysis (i.e. information size) should be at least as large as an adequately powered single trial. Trial sequential analysis (TSA) may reduce risk of random errors due to repetitive testing of accumulating data by evaluating meta-analyses not reaching the information size with monitoring boundaries. This is analogous to sequential monitoring boundaries in a single trial. METHODS: We selected apparently conclusive (P",

author = "Jesper Brok and Kristian Thorlund and J{\o}rn Wetterslev and Christian Gluud",

note = "Keywords: Data Interpretation, Statistical; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Infant, Newborn, Diseases; Meta-Analysis as Topic; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Review Literature as Topic; Sample Size",

year = "2008",

doi = "10.1093/ije/dyn188",

language = "English",

volume = "38",

pages = "287--98",

journal = "International Journal of Epidemiology",

issn = "0300-5771",

publisher = "Oxford University Press",

number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Apparently conclusive meta-analyses may be inconclusive--Trial sequential analysis adjustment of random error risk due to repetitive testing of accumulating data in apparently conclusive neonatal meta-analyses

AU - Brok, Jesper

AU - Thorlund, Kristian

AU - Wetterslev, Jørn

AU - Gluud, Christian

N1 - Keywords: Data Interpretation, Statistical; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Infant, Newborn, Diseases; Meta-Analysis as Topic; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Review Literature as Topic; Sample Size

PY - 2008

Y1 - 2008

N2 - BACKGROUND: Random error may cause misleading evidence in meta-analyses. The required number of participants in a meta-analysis (i.e. information size) should be at least as large as an adequately powered single trial. Trial sequential analysis (TSA) may reduce risk of random errors due to repetitive testing of accumulating data by evaluating meta-analyses not reaching the information size with monitoring boundaries. This is analogous to sequential monitoring boundaries in a single trial. METHODS: We selected apparently conclusive (P

AB - BACKGROUND: Random error may cause misleading evidence in meta-analyses. The required number of participants in a meta-analysis (i.e. information size) should be at least as large as an adequately powered single trial. Trial sequential analysis (TSA) may reduce risk of random errors due to repetitive testing of accumulating data by evaluating meta-analyses not reaching the information size with monitoring boundaries. This is analogous to sequential monitoring boundaries in a single trial. METHODS: We selected apparently conclusive (P

U2 - 10.1093/ije/dyn188

DO - 10.1093/ije/dyn188

M3 - Journal article

C2 - 18824466

SN - 0300-5771

VL - 38

SP - 287

EP - 298

JO - International Journal of Epidemiology

JF - International Journal of Epidemiology

IS - 1

ER -