Evidence mapPaperPMID 39054412Full record

ArticleBMC medical research methodology2024

Tipping point analysis for the between-arm correlation in an arm-based evidence synthesis.

Wenshan Han, Zheng Wang, Mengli Xiao, Zhe He, Haitao Chu, Lifeng Lin

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Tipping point analysis in network meta-analysis.Research synthesis methods · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
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

6 authors.

Wenshan HanDepartment of Statistics, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL, USA.
Zheng WangDepartment of Biostatistics and Research Decision Sciences, Merck & Co., Inc, Rahway, NJ, USA.
Mengli XiaoDepartment of Biostatistics and Informatics, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, CO, USA.
Zhe HeSchool of Information, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL, USA.
Haitao ChuGlobal Biometrics and Data Management, Pfizer Inc., New York, NY, USA. chux0051@umn.edu.
Lifeng LinDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Mel and Enid Zuckerman College of Public Health, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA. lifenglin@arizona.edu.

Funding

Advanced Methods and Software for Trial Sequential Analysis in Living Systematic ReviewsR21LM014533 · UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA · 2025 to 2025
$166k
LabGenie: A Patient-Engagement Tool to Aid Older Adults' Understanding of Lab Test ResultsR21HS029969 · FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY · 2025 to 2025
$135k
Joint modeling of continuous and binary data in meta-analysisR03MH128727 · NIMH · FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY · PI Lifeng Lin · 2023 to 2023
$28k
AHRQ HHS R21 HS029969Arizona Department of Health Services RFGA2023-008-11NIA NIH HHS R21 AG061431NIMH NIH HHS R03 MH128727NLM NIH HHS R01 LM012982NLM NIH HHS R21 LM013911NLM NIH HHS R21 LM014533
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Systematic reviews and meta-analyses are essential tools in contemporary evidence-based medicine, synthesizing evidence from various sources to better inform clinical decision-making. However, the conclusions from different meta-analyses on the same topic can be discrepant, which has raised concerns about their reliability. One reason is that the result of a meta-analysis is sensitive to factors such as study inclusion/exclusion criteria and model assumptions. The arm-based meta-analysis model is growing in importance due to its advantage of including single-arm studies and historical controls with estimation efficiency and its flexibility in drawing conclusions with both marginal and conditional effect measures. Despite its benefits, the inference may heavily depend on the heterogeneity parameters that reflect design and model assumptions. This article aims to evaluate the robustness of meta-analyses using the arm-based model within a Bayesian framework. Specifically, we develop a tipping point analysis of the between-arm correlation parameter to assess the robustness of meta-analysis results. Additionally, we introduce some visualization tools to intuitively display its impact on meta-analysis results. We demonstrate the application of these tools in three real-world meta-analyses, one of which includes single-arm studies.

Indexed as

Evidence-Based MedicineMeta-Analysis as TopicAlgorithmsBayes TheoremHumansModels, StatisticalReproducibility of ResultsSystematic Reviews as TopicArm-based modelCorrelationMeta-analysisRobustnessSingle-arm studyTipping point analysis

Identifiers

PMID39054412
PMCPMC11270800

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.