Varying coefficient meta-analysis methods for odds ratios and risk ratios.

Background The approval of monoclonal antibodies for prevention of migraine has revolutionized treatment for patients. Oral preventatives are still considered first line treatments as head-to-head trials comparing them with antibodies are lacking. Methods The main purpose of this study was to provide a comparative overview of the efficacy of three commonly prescribed migraine preventative medication classes. For this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched the databases CENTRAL, EMBASE, and MEDLINE until 20 March 2020. We included RCTs reporting the 50% response rates for topiramate, Botulinum Toxin Type A and monoclonal antibodies against CGRP(r). Studies were excluded if response rates were not reported, treatment allocation was unclear, or if study quality was insufficient. Primary outcome measure were the 50% response rates. The pooled odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals were calculated with the random effects model. The study was registered at PROSPERO (CRD42020222880). Findings We identified 6552 reports. Thirty-two were eligible for our review. Studies assessing monoclonal antibodies included 13,302 patients and yielded pooled odds ratios for the 50% response rate of 2.30 (CI: 2.11–2.50). Topiramate had an overall effect estimate of 2.70 (CI: 1.97–3.69) with 1989 included patients and Botulinum Toxin Type A achieved 1.28 (CI: 0.98–1. 67) with 2472 patients included. Interpretation Topiramate, botulinum toxin type A and monoclonal antibodies showed higher odds ratios in achieving a 50% response rate compared to placebo. Topiramate numerically demonstrated the greatest effect size but also the highest drop-out rate.

Download Full-text

Methods for Comparing Data across Differently Designed Agronomic Studies: Examples of Different Meta-analysis Methods Used to Compare Relative Composition of Plant Foods Grown Using Organic or Conventional Production Methods and a Protocol for a Systematic Review

Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry ◽

10.1021/jf4008967 ◽

2013 ◽

Vol 61 (30) ◽

pp. 7173-7180 ◽

Cited By ~ 9

Author(s):

Kirsten Brandt ◽

Dominika Średnicka-Tober ◽

Marcin Barański ◽

Roy Sanderson ◽

Carlo Leifert ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Production Methods ◽

Plant Foods ◽

Relative Composition ◽

Analysis Methods ◽

Conventional Production

Download Full-text

Statistical power and utility of meta-analysis methods for cross-phenotype genome-wide association studies

PLoS ONE ◽

10.1371/journal.pone.0193256 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 13 (3) ◽

pp. e0193256 ◽

Cited By ~ 13

Author(s):

Zhaozhong Zhu ◽

Verneri Anttila ◽

Jordan W. Smoller ◽

Phil H. Lee

Keyword(s):

Statistical Power ◽

Association Studies ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Genome Wide Association ◽

Genome Wide Association Studies ◽

Analysis Methods ◽

Genome Wide

Download Full-text

Diagnostic and therapeutic treatment modalities for acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding: a systematic review

Endoscopy International Open ◽

10.1055/s-0043-117958 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 05 (10) ◽

pp. E959-E973 ◽

Cited By ~ 7

Author(s):

Kathryn Oakland ◽

Jennifer Isherwood ◽

Conor Lahiff ◽

Petra Goldsmith ◽

Michael Desborough ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Gastrointestinal Bleeding ◽

Flexible Sigmoidoscopy ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Computed Tomographic Angiography ◽

Lower Gastrointestinal Bleeding ◽

Treatment Modalities ◽

Computed Tomographic ◽

Meta Analyses ◽

Tomographic Angiography ◽

Risk Ratios

Abstract Background and study aims Investigations for lower gastrointestinal bleeding (LGIB) include flexible sigmoidoscopy, colonoscopy, computed tomographic angiography (CTA), and angiography. All may be used to direct endoscopic, radiological or surgical treatment, although their optimal use is unknown. The aims of this study were to determine the diagnostic and therapeutic yields of endoscopy, CTA, and angiography for managing LGIB, and their influence on rebleeding, transfusion, and hospital stay. Patients and methods A systematic search of MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, and CENTRAL was undertaken to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and nonrandomized studies of intervention (NRSIs) published between 2000 and 12 November 2015 in patients hospitalized with LGIB. Separate meta-analyses were conducted, presented as pooled odds (ORs) or risk ratios (RR) with 95 % confidence intervals (CIs). Results Two RCTs and 13 NRSIs were included, none of which examined flexible sigmoidoscopy, or compared endotherapy with embolization, or investigated the timing of CTA or angiography. Two NRSIs (57 – 223 participants) comparing colonoscopy and CTA were of insufficient quality for synthesis but showed no difference in diagnostic yields between the two interventions. One RCT and 4 NRSIs (779 participants) compared early colonoscopy (< 24 hours) with colonoscopy performed later; meta-analysis of the NRSIs demonstrated higher diagnostic and therapeutic yields with early colonoscopy (OR 1.86, 95 %CI 1.12 to 2.86, P = 0.004 and OR 3.08, 95 %CI 1.93 to 4.90, P < 0.001, respectively) and reduced length of stay (mean difference 2.64 days, 95 %CI 1.54 to 3.73), but no difference in transfusion or rebleeding. Conclusions In LGIB there is a paucity of high-quality evidence, although the limited studies on the timing of colonoscopy suggest increased rates of diagnosis and therapy with early colonoscopy.

Download Full-text