Meta-analysis of migraine headache treatments: Combining information from heterogeneous designs

被引:46
作者
Dominici, F [1 ]
Parmigiani, G
Wolpert, RL
Hasselblad, V
机构
[1] Johns Hopkins Univ, Sch Hyg & Publ Hlth, Dept Biostat, Baltimore, MD 21205 USA
[2] Duke Univ, Med Ctr, Inst Stat & Decis Sci, Canc Prevent & Control Unit, Durham, NC 27708 USA
[3] Duke Univ, Med Ctr, Ctr Clin Hlth Policy, Durham, NC 27708 USA
[4] Duke Univ, Inst Stat & Decis Sci, Durham, NC 27708 USA
[5] Duke Univ, Nicholas Sch Environm, Durham, NC 27708 USA
[6] Duke Univ, Med Ctr, Div Biometry, Durham, NC 27708 USA
关键词
data augmentation; hierarchical models; meta-analysis; random effects; ranking;
D O I
10.2307/2669674
中图分类号
O21 [概率论与数理统计]; C8 [统计学];
学科分类号
020208 ; 070103 ; 0714 ;
摘要
Migraine headache is a common condition in the United States for which a wide range of drug and nondrug treatments are available. There is wide disagreement about which treatments are most effective; meta-analysis of existing clinical trials can help to bring existing evidence to bear on this question. Conducting a meta-analysis is a challenging statistical problem because of the absence of a uniform accepted definition of headache syndromes, the diversity of treatments, and the heterogeneous and incomplete nature of published information. The results of studies are summarized in various ways; most studies report continuous treatment effect?, for each treatment, but some report only differences in effectiveness for pairs of treatments, and others report only 2 x 2 contingency tables for dichotomized responses. In this article we present a hierarchical Bayesian grouped random-effects model for synthesizing evidence from several clinical trials comparing the effectiveness of commonly recommended prophylactic treatments for migraine headaches. We incorporate explicitly the relationships among the different classes of treatments and introduce latent auxiliary variables to create a common scale for combining information from studies that report results in very different forms. This model permits us to synthesize this heterogeneous information and to make inferences about treatment effects and the relative ranks of treatment without understating uncertainty. Estimation, ranking, model validation, and sensitivity analysis are all implemented through simulation-based methods.
引用
收藏
页码:16 / 28
页数:13
相关论文
共 44 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 1995, CODA CONVERGENCE DIA
[2]  
[Anonymous], SYSTEMATIC REV TRIAL
[3]   OUTCOMES OF BACTERIAL-MENINGITIS IN CHILDREN - A METAANALYSIS [J].
BARAFF, LJ ;
LEE, SI ;
SCHRIGER, DL .
PEDIATRIC INFECTIOUS DISEASE JOURNAL, 1993, 12 (05) :389-394
[4]  
Bernardo J. M., 1992, BAYESIAN STAT, V4
[5]   Benefits and risks of screening mammography for women in their forties: A statistical appraisal [J].
Berry, DA .
JNCI-JOURNAL OF THE NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE, 1998, 90 (19) :1431-1439
[6]  
BERRY DA, 1990, P BIOPH SECT AM STAT, P1
[7]  
BERRY SM, 1997, P PHASE 3 BAYESIAN D
[8]  
BESAG J, 1997, META ANAL MARKOV CHA
[9]   PASSIVE SMOKING IN THE WORKPLACE - CLASSICAL AND BAYESIAN METAANALYSES [J].
BIGGERSTAFF, BJ ;
TWEEDIE, RL ;
MENGERSEN, KL .
INTERNATIONAL ARCHIVES OF OCCUPATIONAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH, 1994, 66 (04) :269-277
[10]   PLACING TRIALS IN CONTEXT USING BAYESIAN-ANALYSIS - GUSTO REVISITED BY REVEREND BAYES [J].
BROPHY, JM ;
JOSEPH, L .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1995, 273 (11) :871-875