Apparently conclusive meta-analyses on interventions in critical care may be inconclusive —a meta-epidemiological study

Risks of random type I and II errors are associated with false positive and false negative findings. In conventional meta-analyses, the risks of random errors are insufficiently evaluated. Many meta-analyses, which appear conclusive, might, in fact, be inconclusive because of risks of random errors. We hypothesize that, for interventions in critical care, false positive and false negative findings frequently become apparent when accounting for the risks of random error. We aim to investigate to which extent apparently conclusive conventional meta-analyses remain conclusive when adjusting statistical significance levels and confidence intervals considering sparse data and repeated testing through Trial Sequential Analysis (TSA).

Source: Journal of Clinical Epidemiology - June 10, 2019 Category: Epidemiology Authors: Thijs M. Koster, J ørn Wetterslev, Christian Gluud, Janus C. Jakobsen, Thomas Kaufmann, Ruben J. Eck, Geert Koster, Bart Hiemstra, Iwan C.C. van der Horst, Eric Keus Tags: Review Source Type: research