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 | Zendy

Jesper Brok | Zendy; Kristian Thorlund | Zendy; Jørn Wetterslev | Zendy; Christian Gluud | Zendy

Open Access

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

Author(s) -

Jesper Brok,

Kristian Thorlund,

Jørn Wetterslev,

Christian Gluud

Publication year - 2008

Publication title -

international journal of epidemiology

Language(s) - English

Resource type - Journals

SCImago Journal Rank - 3.406

H-Index - 208

eISSN - 1464-3685

pISSN - 0300-5771

DOI - 10.1093/ije/dyn188

Subject(s) - meta analysis , random effects model , study heterogeneity , medicine , statistic , statistics , relative risk , randomized controlled trial , sample size determination , confidence interval , mathematics

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.

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.

Having issues? You can contact us here

Accelerating Research