Abstract

OBJECTIVE
For continuous outcomes measured using instruments with an established minimally important difference (MID), pooled estimates can be usefully reported in MID units. Approaches suggested thus far omit studies that used instruments without an established MID. We describe an approach that addresses this limitation.
STUDY DESIGN
Using the ratio of MID to standard deviation in the trials with an established MID, we imputed the MID for instruments without an established MID and pooled across all trials. We applied this approach to two meta-analyses.
RESULTS
In 20 trials of respiratory rehabilitation, the pooled estimate did not differ significantly between trials with an established MID and those without an established MID (interaction P=0.23). The same was true for 52 trials examining amitriptyline vs. other antidepressants (interaction P=0.54). In the respiratory example, the addition of trials without an established MID led to little change in point estimates or confidence intervals (CIs, more data balanced by more heterogeneity in a random effects model). In the antidepressant example, the additional trials resulted in an identical point estimate with a narrowing of the CI.
CONCLUSION
Our method allows estimates of a pooled effect in MID units using both trials with and without an established MID.

Links

Publisher Full Text

Authors

Johnston BC, Thorlund K, da Costa BR, Furukawa TA, Guyatt GH

Institution

Department of Anaesthesia & Pain Medicine, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. bjohnst@mcmaster.ca

Source

Journal of clinical epidemiology 65:8 2012 Aug pg 817-26

MeSH

Amitriptyline
Antidepressive Agents
Confidence Intervals
Data Interpretation, Statistical
Depressive Disorder, Major
Humans
Meta-Analysis as Topic
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive
Quality of Life
Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
Sample Size

Pub Type(s)

Journal Article

Language

eng

PubMed ID

22652347