This article describes the new meta-analysis command metaan, which can be used to perform fixed- or random-effects meta-analysis. Besides the standard DerSimonian and Laird approach, metaan offers a wide choice of available models: maximum likelihood, profile likelihood, restricted maximum likelihood, and a permutation model. The command reports a variety of heterogeneity measures, including Cochran's Q, I2, H2M, and the between-studies variance estimate . A forest plot and a graph of the maximum likelihood function can also be generated.
BöhningD., MalzahnU., DietzE., SchlattmannP., ViwatwongkasemC., and BiggeriA.2002. Some general points in estimating heterogeneity variance with the DerSimonian–Laird estimator. Biostatistics3: 445–457.
2.
BrockwellS. E., and GordonI. R.2001. A comparison of statistical methods for meta-analysis. Statistics in Medicine20: 825–840.
3.
DerSimonianR., and LairdN.1986. Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Controlled Clinical Trials7: 177–188.
4.
FollmannD. A., and ProschanM. A.1999. Valid inference in random effects meta-analysis. Biometrics55: 732–737.
5.
HarbordR. M., and HigginsJ. P. T.2008. Meta-regression in Stata. Stata Journal8: 493–519.
6.
HardyR. J., and ThompsonS. G.1996. A likelihood approach to meta-analysis with random effects. Statistics in Medicine15: 619–629.
7.
HardyR. J.1998. Detecting and describing heterogeneity in meta-analysis. Statistics in Medicine17: 841–856.
8.
HarrisR. J., BradburnM. J., DeeksJ. J., HarbordR. M., AltmanD. G., and SterneJ. A. C.2008. metan: Fixed- and random-effects meta-analysis. Stata Journal8: 3–28.
HigginsJ. P. T., ThompsonS. G., DeeksJ. J., and AltmanD. G.2003. Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. British Medical Journal327: 557–560.
12.
HuqueM. F.1988. Experiences with meta-analysis in NDA submissions. Proceedings of the Biopharmaceutical Section of the American Statistical Association2: 28–33.
13.
KontopantelisE., and ReevesD.2009. MetaEasy: A meta-analysis add-in for Microsoft Excel. Journal of Statistical Software30: 1–25.
14.
LambertP. C., SuttonA. J., AbramsK. R., and JonesD. R.2002. A comparison of summary patient-level covariates in meta-regression with individual patient data meta-analysis. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology55: 86–94.
15.
MittlböockM., and HeinzlH.2006. A simulation study comparing properties of heterogeneity measures in meta-analyses. Statistics in Medicine25: 4321–4333.
16.
NormandS.-L. T.1999. Meta-analysis: Formulating, evaluating, combining, and reporting. Statistics in Medicine18: 321–359.
17.
OlkinI., and SampsonA.1998. Comparison of meta-analysis versus analysis of variance of individual patient data. Biometrics54: 317–322.
18.
SidikK., and JonkmanJ. N.2007. A comparison of heterogeneity variance estimators in combining results of studies. Statistics in Medicine26: 1964–1981.
19.
StewartL. A.1995. Practical methodology of meta-analyses (overviews) using updated individual patient data. Statistics in Medicine14: 2057–2079.
20.
ThompsonS. G.1994. Systematic review: Why sources of heterogeneity in meta-analysis should be investigated. British Medical Journal309: 1351–1355.
21.
ThompsonS. G., and PocockS. J.1991. Can meta-analyses be trusted?Lancet338: 1127–1130.
22.
ThompsonS. G., and SharpS. J.1999. Explaining heterogeneity in meta-analysis: A comparison of methods. Statistics in Medicine18: 2693–2708.
23.
WhiteI. R.2009. Multivariate random-effects meta-analysis. Stata Journal9: 40–56.
