We propose a general approach based on the concept of overdispersion for specification of a random effects model (REM) in meta-analysis. This approach is similar to that used in generalized linear models, and includes the traditional REM as a particular case. A key feature of the model is the interpretation of the multiplicative factor as an intra-class correlation parameter. We provide several motivating examples, discuss statistical inference, and compare the new and standard methods on two examples of published meta-analyses. Estimation of the overdispersion parameter in the proposed model is compared in simulations to that of the traditional between-studies variance in the case of normal means. For small values of heterogeneity, the coverage of the confidence intervals for the overdispersion parameter is more stable.
AndersonDA (1988) Some models for overdispersed binomial data. Australian Journal of Statistics, 30, 125–48.
2.
BiggerstaffBJacksonD (2008) The exact distribution of Cochrans’ heterogeneity statistic in one-way random effects meta-analysis. Statistics in Medicine, 27, 6093–110.
3.
BiggerstaffBTweedieR (1997) Incorporating variability in estimates of heterogeneity in the random effects model in meta-analysis. Statistics in Medicine, 16, 753–68.
4.
BlissCI (1953) Fitting the negative binomial distribution to biological data. Biometrics, 9, 176–96.
5.
CollinsRYusufSPetoR (1985) Overview of randomised trials of diuretics in pregnancy. British Medical Journal, 291, 97–104.
6.
CoxD (1983) Some remarks on overdispersion. Biometrika, 70, 269–74.
7.
CrowleyPChalmersIKeirseM (1990) The effects of corticosteroid administration before preterm delivery: an overview of the evidence from controlled trials. Br J Obstet Gynaecol, 97, 11–25.
8.
DerSimonianRKackerR (2007) Random-effects model for meta-analysis of clinical trials: an update. Contemporary Clinical Trials, 28, 105–14.
HardyRThompsonS (1996) A likelihood approach to meta-analysis. Statistics in Medicine, 15, 619–29.
11.
HedgesLOlkinI (1985) Statistical methods for meta-analysis. Orlando: Academic Press.
12.
HindeJDemétrioCGB (1998) Overdispersion: models and estimation. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, 27, 151–70.
13.
KimC (2006) Overdispersion. In Encyclopedia of Statistical Sciences. New York: John Wiley & Sons, DOI: 10.1002/0471667196.ess0701.pub2.
14.
KulinskayaEDollingerMBjørkestølK (2011) Testing for homogeneity in meta-analysis I. The one parameter case: Standardized mean difference. Biometrics, 67, 203–12.
15.
LeeKThompsonS (2008) Flexible parametric models for random-effects distributions. Statistics in Medicine, 27, 418–34.
16.
LiYShiLRothH (1994) The bias of the commonly-used estimate of variance in meta-analysis. Communications in Statistics - Theory and Methods, 23, 1063–85.
17.
MandelJPauleR (1970) Interlaboratory evaluation of a material with unequal number of replicates. Analytical Chemistry, 42, 1194–97.
18.
MorenoSSuttonAAdesAStanleyTAbramsKPetersJCooperN (2009) Assessment of regression-based methods to adjust for publication bias through a comprehensive simulation study. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 9, 2.
19.
MorenoSSuttonAThompsonJAdesAAbramsKCooperN (2012) A generalised weighting regression-derived meta-analysis estimator robust to small study effects and heterogeneity. Statistics in Medicine, 31, 1407–17.
20.
OlkinISanerH (2001) Approximation for trimmed Fisher procedures in research synthesis. Statistical Methods in Medical Research, 10, 267–76.
21.
PetoR (1987) Why do we need systematic overviews of randomized trials?Statistics in Medicine, 6, 233–40.
22.
PrenticeR (1986) Binary regression using an extended beta-binomial distribution, with discussion of correlation induced by covariate measurement errors. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 81, 321–27.
23.
PryseleyATchonlafiCVerbekeGMolenberghsG (2011) Estimating negative variance components from gaussian and non-gaussian data: a mixed models approach. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, 55, 1071–85.
24.
RukhinA (2003) Two procedures of meta-analysis in clinical trials and interlaboratory studies. Tatra Mountains Mathematical Publications, 26, 155–68.
25.
RukhinA (2009) Weighted means statistics in interlaboratory studies. Metrologia, 46, 323–31.
26.
RukhinABiggerstaffBVangelM (2000) Restricted maximum likelihood estimation of a common mean and the Mandel-Paule algorithm. Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference, 83, 319–30.
27.
ThompsonSSharpS (1999) Explaining heter¬ogeneity in meta-analysis: a comparison of methods. Statistics in Medicine, 18, 2693–708.
28.
TukeyJWilksS (1946) Approximation of the distribution of the product of beta variables by a single beta variable. Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 17, 318–24.
29.
ViechtbauerW (2007) Confidence intervals for the amount of heterogeneity in meta-analysis. Statistics in Medicine, 26, 37–52.
30.
WelchB (1951) On the comparison of several mean values: an alternative approach. Biometrika, 38, 330–36.
31.
Young-XuYChanK (2008) Pooling overdispersed binomial data to estimate event rate. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 8, 358.
