2001
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.021529998
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Evolution of treatment effects over time: Empirical insight from recursive cumulative metaanalyses

Abstract: Evidence on how much medical interventions work may change over time. It is important to determine what fluctuations in the treatment effect reported by randomized trials and their metaanalyses may be expected and whether extreme fluctuations signal future major changes. We applied recursive cumulative metaanalysis of randomized controlled trials to evaluate the relative change in the pooled treatment effect (odds ratio) over time for 60 interventions in two medical fields (pregnancy͞perinatal medicine, n ‫؍‬ … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
97
0

Year Published

2002
2002
2008
2008

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 83 publications
(97 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
0
97
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Finally, we performed cumulative meta-analysis and recursive cumulative meta-analysis (27,28) to evaluate whether the combined OR changed over time as more data were accumulated for each comparison and contrast. Inverted funnel plots (29) were examined as diagnostics for heterogeneity related to the sample size of each study.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Finally, we performed cumulative meta-analysis and recursive cumulative meta-analysis (27,28) to evaluate whether the combined OR changed over time as more data were accumulated for each comparison and contrast. Inverted funnel plots (29) were examined as diagnostics for heterogeneity related to the sample size of each study.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This research is critical to the understanding of intervention change in this area of science. Indeed, often times initial studies finding positive effects of interventions are subsequently contradicted by further well-conducted research on these same interventions; subsequent research often finds no evidence for positive intervention effects, or even evidence of significantly negative intervention effects (e.g., Ioannidis, 2005;Ioannidis & Lau, 2001;Ioannidis & Trikalinos, 2005;Trikalinos et al, 2004).It is likely that if replication studies in the published psychological intervention literatures were as common as they are in published literatures of the general medical sciences, these same inconsistencies may be observed. Thus, all well-conducted intervention studies, regardless of their RPC Model classification, speak to the wide variability of change.…”
mentioning
confidence: 87%
“…This research is critical to the understanding of intervention change in this area of science. Indeed, often times initial studies finding positive effects of interventions are subsequently contradicted by further well-conducted research on these same interventions; subsequent research often finds no evidence for positive intervention effects, or even evidence of significantly negative intervention effects (e.g., Ioannidis, 2005;Ioannidis & Lau, 2001;Ioannidis & Trikalinos, 2005;Trikalinos et al, 2004).…”
Section: Nih-pa Author Manuscriptmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We also used appropriate bias diagnostics to examine whether there was evidence that the results differed in small studies compared with large studies 22 or whether results were changing gradually over time with the publication of more recent studies. 23 Analyses were conducted in using SPSS (version 10.0; SPSS, Inc., Chicago, IL), Meta-Analyst (Joseph Lau, Boston, MA) and Meta-Test (Joseph Lau) software packages. P values are two-tailed.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%