Session 6: Reviews of Evidence Flashcards

1
Q

Features of narrative reviews.

A

Implicit assumptions

Opaque methodology

Not reproducible leading to bias and subjectivity

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Give features of systematic reviews.

A

A clearly focused question

An explicity statement about type of study, type of participants, types of interventions, types of outcome measures.

A systematic literature search

A selection of materials

Appraisal

A synthesis possible including a meta-analysis.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Key features of systematic reviews.

A

Explicit assumptions

Transparent methodology

Reproducible leading to unbias and objectivity

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

What is a meta-analysis?

A

A quantitative synthesis of the results of two or more primary studies that addressed the same hypothesis in the same way.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Difference between systematic review and meta-analysis.

A

A systematic review will not necessarily include a meta-analysis but more or less all MA have systematic reviews.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Give an example of when systematic review won’t include MA.

A

When clinical heterogeneity is too great

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Purpose of meta-analysis.

A

Facilitate synthesis of a large number of study results.

Systematically collate study results

Reduce problems of interpretation due to variations in sampling

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Quality criteria of MA.

A

Compilation of complete set of studies

Identification of common variable or category definition.

Standardised data extraction

Analysis allowing for sources of variation

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Calculate the odds ratio of surviving.

A

Aspirin: 566/49 = 11.55:1

Placebo: 557/67 = 8.31:1

Odds ratio = 11.55/8.31 = 1.39

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Interpret the result of the odds ratio being 1.39.

A

1.39 more likely to survive if you are on aspirin then on placebo.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

The odds ratio is 1.39 and the error factor is 1.48.

Calculate the confidence interval.

A
  1. 39 x 1.48 = 2.05
  2. 39/1.48 = 0.94

The confidence interval is 0.94 - 2.05

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

The confidence interval is 0.94 - 2.05

Is the result statistically significant?

A

No.

The null hypothesis (1) is within the confidence interval which means that the result could be due to chance.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Meta-analysis calculated a pooled estimate of odds ratio.

Explain what this means.

A

Odds ratio and their 95% CIs are calculated for each study.

They are then combined to give a pooled estimate odds ratio using a statistical computer program.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

In the pooled estimate the individual studies are weighted.

Weighted according to what?

A

Their size

The uncertainty of their odds ratio

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

What does a large size of a study suggest in weight?

A

Greater weight

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

What does a narrow CI suggest according to weight?

A

A narrow CI = greater weight

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

How are meta-analysis visualised?

A

By a forest plot.

18
Q

What does the size of the square indicate?

A

Weight of the study

19
Q

What does the line going through each square indicate?

A

The CI of that study

20
Q

What does the vertical line indicate?

A

The null hypothesis

21
Q

What does the width of the diamond indicate?

A

The confidence interval of the pooled estimate

22
Q

What does the vertical dotted line indicate?

A

The pooled odds ratio

23
Q

Problems with meta-analysis

A

Heterogeneity between studies

Variable quality of the studies

Publication bias in selection of the studies

24
Q

What are the two models in order to take heterogeneity into account?

A

Fixed effect model

Random effect model

25
Q

Explain fixed effect model

A

Assumes that the studies are estimating exactly the same true effect size.

There is only one true effect in fixed effect model

26
Q

Explain random effect model.

A

Assumes that the studies are estimating similar, but not the same true effect size.

There is mean true effect

27
Q

Pooled estimate OR in fixed effect model was 1.11.

Pooled estimate OR in random effects model was 1.14.

The between study variance (t2) was 0.01.

What does this mean?

A

That the heterogeneity between the studies was low.

28
Q

How does the odds ratio differ in fixed vs random effect?

A

It is often very similar.

29
Q

How does the 95% CI differ in fixed vs random effect?

A

Often wide in random effect vs fixed effect.

30
Q

How does the weighting of the studies differ in random effects vs fixed effect model?

A

More equal between studies in the random effects model which means that there is greater weighting towards small studies.

31
Q

A test for heterogeneity has a p value of 0.082.

The p-value is regarded significant if the p-value is less than 0.1.

What does this mean?

A

This means that we can reject the null-hypothesis which is that there is heterogeneity.

In other words this means that there is homogeneity.

32
Q

Limitations of random effects model and heterogeneity.

A

Random effects model can only account for variation but not explain it.

33
Q

What is used to explain heterogeneity?

A

Sub-group analysis

34
Q

Give examples of variable quality.

A

Poor study design

Poor design protocol

Poor protocol implementation

35
Q

Rank studies in how prone they are to bias. (More prone higher up)

A

Case-control

Cohort

Non-randomised controlled trials

Randomised controlled trials

36
Q

Approaches to analyse variable quality in studies.

A

Define a basic quality standard and only include studies that satisfy the criteria.

Score each study for its quality and then incorporate the quality score into weighting, or use sub-group analyses to explore differences (high quality studies vs. low quality studies)

37
Q

Give examples of what to assess in RCTs.

A

Allocation methods (was it randomised?)

Blinding and outcome assessment

Intention-To-Treat

Appropriate statistical analysis

38
Q

What is publication bias?

A

Studies with statistically significant or favourable restults are more likely to be published than those studies with non-statistically significant or unfavourable results.

This applies particularly to smaller studies.

39
Q

What does publication bias mean in terms of systematic review or meta-analysis?

A

That they can be flawed by such bias.

Publication bias leads to a biased selection of studies towards demonstration of effect.

40
Q

What is used in order to identify whether there is publication bias or not?

A

Plot results of identified studies against a measure of their size via a funnel plot.

41
Q
A