Evidence mapPaperPMID 38100399Full record

SynthesisPloS one2023

A statistical method for removing unbalanced trials with multiple covariates in meta-analysis.

Massimo Attanasio, Fabio Aiello, Fabio Tinè

Abstract readMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Massimo AttanasioDipartimento di Scienze Economiche, Aziendali e Statistiche, Università di Palermo, Palermo, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-2684-5530
Fabio AielloFacoltà di Scienze Economiche e Giuridiche, Università "Kore" di Enna, Enna, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-5494-5179
Fabio TinèAzienda Sanitaria Universitaria Giuliano Isontina (ASI GI), Trieste, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In meta-analysis literature, there are several checklists describing the procedures necessary to evaluate studies from a qualitative point of view, whereas preliminary quantitative and statistical investigations on the "combinability" of trials have been neglected. Covariate balance is an important prerequisite to conduct meta-analysis. We propose a method to identify unbalanced trials with respect to a set of covariates, in presence of covariate imbalance, namely when the randomized controlled trials generate a meta-sample that cannot satisfy the requisite of randomization/combinability in meta-analysis. The method is able to identify the unbalanced trials, through four stages aimed at achieving combinability. The studies responsible for the imbalance are identified, and then they can be eliminated. The proposed procedure is simple and relies on the combined Anderson-Darling test applied to the Empirical Cumulative Distribution Functions of both experimental and control meta-arms. To illustrate the method in practice, two datasets from well-known meta-analyses in the literature are used.

Indexed as

Research DesignClinical ProtocolsComputer Simulation

Identifiers

PMID38100399
PMCPMC10723740

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.