Bayesian approaches to random-effects meta-analysis: A comparative study

Current methods for meta‐analysis still leave a number of unresolved issues, such as the choice between fixed‐ and random‐effects models, the choice of population distribution in a random‐effects analysis, the treatment of small studies and extreme results, and incorporation of study‐specific covari...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Statistics in medicine 1995-12, Vol.14 (24), p.2685-2699
Hauptverfasser: Smith, Teresa C., Spiegelhalter, David J., Thomas, Andrew
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Current methods for meta‐analysis still leave a number of unresolved issues, such as the choice between fixed‐ and random‐effects models, the choice of population distribution in a random‐effects analysis, the treatment of small studies and extreme results, and incorporation of study‐specific covariates. We describe how a full Bayesian analysis can deal with these and other issues in a natural way, illustrated by a recent published example that displays a number of problems. Such analyses are now generally available using the BUGS implementation of Markov chain Monte Carlo numerical integration techniques. Appropriate proper prior distributions are derived, and sensitivity analysis to a variety of prior assumptions carried out. Current methods are briefly summarized and compared to the full Bayes analysis.
ISSN:0277-6715
1097-0258
DOI:10.1002/sim.4780142408