...
【24h】

Meta-analysis 101

机译:分析后101

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Iread with interest the article "Prevalence of peg-shaped maxillary permanent lateral incisors: A meta-analysis" (Hua F, He H, Mgan P, Bouzid W. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2013;144:97-109); although 1 congratulate the authors for their effort, 1 have some objections about the methods used.The choice between fixed-effect (not "fixed-effects") and random-effects models is made based on the P value of Cochran's Q test for heterogeneity. This misconception is often made and is fundamentally wrong: "The choice between a fixed-effect and a random-effects meta-analysis should never be made on the basis of a statistical test for heterogeneity."1 The reasons, in short, are (1) this choice should be made in the protocol stage, (2) based on both clinical and statistical reasoning, and, (3) most importantly, the 2 models do not do the same thing! Under the fixed-effect assumption, between-study differences are solely due to random error, whereas under the random-effects, they are due to population or setting differences.
机译:感兴趣的阅读文章“钉状上颌恒切牙的患病率:一项荟萃分析”(Hua F,He H,Mgan P,Bouzid W. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2013; 144:97-109);尽管1表示祝贺,但1对使用的方法有一些异议。在固定效果模型(不是“固定效果”)和随机效果模型之间进行选择是基于Cochran Q检验异质性的P值进行的。 。这种误解常常是犯错的,并且从根本上是错误的:“在固定效果和随机效果的荟萃分析之间进行选择时,切勿基于异质性的统计检验。” 1简而言之,原因是( 1)应该在协议阶段做出选择;(2)基于临床和统计推理;(3)最重要的是,这两种模型不能做相同的事情!在固定效应假设下,研究之间的差异完全是由于随机误差造成的,而在随机效应下,它们之间的差异是由于人口或环境差异造成的。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号