Top

Published in:

Open Access 01-12-2022 | Letter

Empirical comparisons of heterogeneity magnitudes of the risk difference, relative risk, and odds ratio

Authors: Yuxi Zhao, Elizabeth H. Slate, Chang Xu, Haitao Chu, Lifeng Lin

Published in: Systematic Reviews | Issue 1/2022

Excerpt

In epidemiology and medical research, the choices of effect measures for binary outcomes have been long debated. Common choices include the risk difference (RD), relative risk (RR), and odds ratio (OR). The RD is often considered more heterogeneous than the ratio measures, RR and OR [1, 2]. Nevertheless, the arguments supporting this claim have been challenged [3]. For example, more rejections of homogeneity in hypothesis testing of RDs are expected than those of ORs. This article empirically compares the heterogeneity magnitudes between the RD, RR, and OR. …

Available only for authorised users

Engels EA, Schmid CH, Terrin N, Olkin I, Lau J. Heterogeneity and statistical significance in meta-analysis: an empirical study of 125 meta-analyses. Stat Med. 2000;19(13):1707–28.CrossRef

Deeks JJ. Issues in the selection of a summary statistic for meta-analysis of clinical trials with binary outcomes. Stat Med. 2002;21(11):1575–600.CrossRef

Poole C, Shrier I, VanderWeele TJ. Is the risk difference really a more heterogeneous measure? Epidemiology. 2015;26(5):714–8.CrossRef

Higgins JPT, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, Altman DG. Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ. 2003;327(7414):557–60.CrossRef

Lin L, Chu H, Murad MH, Hong C, Qu Z, Cole SR, et al. Empirical comparison of publication bias tests in meta-analysis. J Gen Int Med. 2018;33(8):1260–7.CrossRef

Ma X, Lin L, Qu Z, Zhu M, Chu H. Performance of between-study heterogeneity measures in the Cochrane Library. Epidemiology. 2018;29(6):821–4.CrossRef

Lin L, Shi L, Chu H, Murad MH. The magnitude of small-study effects in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews: an empirical study of nearly 30 000 meta-analyses. BMJ Evid Based Med. 2020;25(1):27–32.CrossRef

Takkouche B, Khudyakov P, Costa-Bouzas J, Spiegelman D. Confidence intervals for heterogeneity measures in meta-analysis. Am J Epidemiol. 2013;178(6):993–1004.CrossRef

IntHout J, Ioannidis JPA, Borm GF, Goeman JJ. Small studies are more heterogeneous than large ones: a meta-meta-analysis. J Clin Epidemiol. 2015;68(8):860–9.CrossRef

10.

Xu C, Furuya-Kanamori L, Zorzela L, Lin L, Vohra S. A proposed framework to guide evidence synthesis practice for meta-analysis with zero-events studies. J Clin Epidemiol. 2021;135:70–8.CrossRef

Title: Empirical comparisons of heterogeneity magnitudes of the risk difference, relative risk, and odds ratio
Authors: Yuxi Zhao
Elizabeth H. Slate
Chang Xu
Haitao Chu
Lifeng Lin
Publication date: 01-12-2022
Publisher: BioMed Central
Published in: Systematic Reviews / Issue 1/2022
Electronic ISSN: 2046-4053
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-022-01895-7

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Empirical comparisons of heterogeneity magnitudes of the risk difference, relative risk, and odds ratio

Excerpt

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Excerpt

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2022

Exploring the Gantt chart as a tool to highlight double report in case series published during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic

Impact of health system engagement on the health and well-being of people who use drugs: a realist review protocol

Acceptance and use of complementary and alternative medicine among medical specialists: a 15-year systematic review and data synthesis

Objective assessment of mental stress in individuals with different levels of effort reward imbalance or overcommitment using heart rate variability: a systematic review

Paper 1: Demand-driven rapid reviews for health policy and systems decision-making: lessons from Lebanon, Ethiopia, and South Africa on researchers and policymakers’ experiences

Impact on mental health and wellbeing in Indigenous communities due to land loss resulting from industrial resource development: protocol for a systematic review