Downloads: 158
Files in This Item:
File | Description | Size | Format | |
---|---|---|---|---|
1471-2288-14-30.pdf | 371.61 kB | Adobe PDF | View/Open |
Title: | Which is more generalizable, powerful and interpretable in meta-analyses, mean difference or standardized mean difference? |
Authors: | Takeshima, Nozomi Sozu, Takashi ![]() Tajika, Aran ![]() ![]() Ogawa, Yusuke ![]() ![]() Hayasaka, Yu Furukawa, Toshiaki A ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Author's alias: | 竹島, 望 |
Issue Date: | 21-Feb-2014 |
Publisher: | BioMed Central |
Journal title: | BMC medical research methodology |
Volume: | 14 |
Thesis number: | 30 |
Abstract: | Background: To examine empirically whether the mean difference (MD) or the standardised mean difference (SMD) is more generalizable and statistically powerful in meta-analyses of continuous outcomes when the same unit is used. Methods: From all the Cochrane Database (March 2013), we identified systematic reviews that combined 3 or more randomised controlled trials (RCT) using the same continuous outcome. Generalizability was assessed using the I-squared (I2) and the percentage agreement. The percentage agreement was calculated by comparing the MD or SMD of each RCT with the corresponding MD or SMD from the meta-analysis of all the other RCTs. The statistical power was estimated using Z-scores. Meta-analyses were conducted using both random-effects and fixed-effect models. Results: 1068 meta-analyses were included. The I2 index was significantly smaller for the SMD than for the MD (P < 0.0001, sign test). For continuous outcomes, the current Cochrane reviews pooled some extremely heterogeneous results. When all these or less heterogeneous subsets of the reviews were examined, the SMD always showed a greater percentage agreement than the MD. When the I2 index was less than 30%, the percentage agreement was 55.3% for MD and 59.8% for SMD in the random-effects model and 53.0% and 59.8%, respectively, in the fixed effect model (both P < 0.0001, sign test). Although the Z-scores were larger for MD than for SMD, there were no differences in the percentage of statistical significance between MD and SMD in either model. Inclusions: The SMD was more generalizable than the MD. The MD had a greater statistical power than the SMD but did not result in material differences. |
Rights: | © 2014 Takeshima et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
URI: | http://hdl.handle.net/2433/185153 |
DOI(Published Version): | 10.1186/1471-2288-14-30 |
PubMed ID: | 24559167 |
Appears in Collections: | Journal Articles |

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.