Methods of estimating the pooled effect size under meta-analysis: A comparative appraisal

Abstract

Introduction Present study has compared methods of synthesizing the pooled effect estimate under meta-analysis, namely Fixed Effect Method (FEM), Random Effects Method (REM) and a recently proposed Weighted Least Square (WLS) method. Methods Three methods of estimating pooled effect estimates under meta-analysis were compared on the basis of coverage probability and width of confidence interval. These methods were compared for seven outcomes with varying heterogeneity and sample size using real data of systematic review comparing neo-adjuvant chemotherapy with adjuvant chemotherapy involving ‘hazard ratio' and ‘risk ratio' as effect size. Results WLS method was found to be superior to FEM having higher coverage probability in case of heterogeneity. Further, WLS with similar coverage probability was found to be superior to REM with more precise confidence interval. Conclusion Unrestricted WLS method needs to be preferred unconditionally over fixed effect method and random effects method.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 11 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.