Meta-analysis in the assessment of treatment outcome

Randomized clinical trials provide the most reliable estimates of the benefits and harms of treatments. Limited sample sizes restrict their power to allow informative analyses of secondary outcomes, or patient subgroups. The overall results of trials only apply to the average patient and clinical ap...

ver descrição completa

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor principal: Geddes, J
Outros Autores: British Association for Psychopharmacology
Formato: Journal article
Idioma:English
Publicado em: SAGE Publications 2006
Assuntos:
_version_ 1826270821517099008
author Geddes, J
author2 British Association for Psychopharmacology
author_facet British Association for Psychopharmacology
Geddes, J
author_sort Geddes, J
collection OXFORD
description Randomized clinical trials provide the most reliable estimates of the benefits and harms of treatments. Limited sample sizes restrict their power to allow informative analyses of secondary outcomes, or patient subgroups. The overall results of trials only apply to the average patient and clinical application ignores the individual patient differences. Meta-analysis in the context of a systematic review can produced more precise estimates of effect by combining the results of primary studies. This is particularly valuable for investigating rare, but important outcomes such as suicide. Variations between the trial-specific results can be investigated by meta-regression. Individual patient data meta-analyses (IPDMAs) are potentially much more powerful designs because they allow analysis of patient-level variables. As more genetic factors are identified that might account for treatment variability between individuals, IPDMAs offer a powerful strategy that can be used on existing trial data sets. Despite practical difficulties, IPDMAs are increasingly being conducted.
first_indexed 2024-03-06T21:46:51Z
format Journal article
id oxford-uuid:49e1a978-56c8-4f2b-bede-77a7d9f6fa6a
institution University of Oxford
language English
last_indexed 2024-03-06T21:46:51Z
publishDate 2006
publisher SAGE Publications
record_format dspace
spelling oxford-uuid:49e1a978-56c8-4f2b-bede-77a7d9f6fa6a2022-03-26T15:34:25ZMeta-analysis in the assessment of treatment outcomeJournal articlehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_dcae04bcuuid:49e1a978-56c8-4f2b-bede-77a7d9f6fa6aPsychiatryEnglishOxford University Research Archive - ValetSAGE Publications2006Geddes, JBritish Association for PsychopharmacologyRandomized clinical trials provide the most reliable estimates of the benefits and harms of treatments. Limited sample sizes restrict their power to allow informative analyses of secondary outcomes, or patient subgroups. The overall results of trials only apply to the average patient and clinical application ignores the individual patient differences. Meta-analysis in the context of a systematic review can produced more precise estimates of effect by combining the results of primary studies. This is particularly valuable for investigating rare, but important outcomes such as suicide. Variations between the trial-specific results can be investigated by meta-regression. Individual patient data meta-analyses (IPDMAs) are potentially much more powerful designs because they allow analysis of patient-level variables. As more genetic factors are identified that might account for treatment variability between individuals, IPDMAs offer a powerful strategy that can be used on existing trial data sets. Despite practical difficulties, IPDMAs are increasingly being conducted.
spellingShingle Psychiatry
Geddes, J
Meta-analysis in the assessment of treatment outcome
title Meta-analysis in the assessment of treatment outcome
title_full Meta-analysis in the assessment of treatment outcome
title_fullStr Meta-analysis in the assessment of treatment outcome
title_full_unstemmed Meta-analysis in the assessment of treatment outcome
title_short Meta-analysis in the assessment of treatment outcome
title_sort meta analysis in the assessment of treatment outcome
topic Psychiatry
work_keys_str_mv AT geddesj metaanalysisintheassessmentoftreatmentoutcome