Laopaiboon M
Department of Biostatistics and Demography, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand.
Stat Methods Med Res. 2003 Dec;12(6):515-30. doi: 10.1191/0962280203sm347oa.
Throughout the 1980s and 1990s cluster randomization trials have been increasingly used to evaluate effectiveness of health care intervention. Such trials have raised several methodologic challenges in analysis. Meta-analyses involving cluster randomization trials are becoming common in the area of health care intervention. However, as yet there has been no empirical evidence of current practice in the meta-analyses. Thus a review was performed to identify and examine synthesis approaches of meta-analyses involving cluster randomization trials in the published literature. Electronic databases were searched for meta-analyses involving cluster randomization trials from the earliest date available to 2000. Once a meta-analysis was identified, papers on the relevant cluster randomization trials included were also requested. Each of the original papers of cluster randomization trials included was examined for its randomized design and unit, and adjustment for clustering effect in analysis. Each of the selected meta-analyses was then evaluated as to its synthesis concerning clustering effect. In total, 25 eligible meta-analyses were reviewed. Of these, 15 meta-analyses reported simple conventional methods of the fixed-effect model as method of analysis, while six did not incorporate the cluster randomization trial results in the synthesis methods but described the trial results individually. Three meta-analyses attempted to account for the clustering effect in the synthesis methods but approaches were in arbitrary. Fifteen meta-analyses included more than one cluster randomization trial, each of which included cluster randomization trials with a mixture of randomized designs and units, and units of analysis. These mixture situations might increase heterogeneity, but have not been considered in any meta-analysis. Some methods dealing with a binary outcome for some specific situations have been discussed. In conclusion, some difficulties in the quantitative synthesis procedures were found in the meta-analyses involving cluster randomization trials. Recommendations in the applications of approaches to some specific situations in a binary outcome variable have also been provided. There are still, however, several methodologic issues of the meta-analyses involving cluster randomization trials that need to be investigated further.
在整个20世纪80年代和90年代,整群随机试验越来越多地被用于评估医疗保健干预措施的有效性。此类试验在分析方面带来了若干方法学挑战。涉及整群随机试验的荟萃分析在医疗保健干预领域正变得越来越普遍。然而,目前尚无关于荟萃分析中当前实践的实证证据。因此,进行了一项综述,以识别和研究已发表文献中涉及整群随机试验的荟萃分析的综合方法。通过电子数据库搜索了从可获取的最早日期到2000年涉及整群随机试验的荟萃分析。一旦确定了一项荟萃分析,还会索要有关所纳入的相关整群随机试验的论文。对所纳入的每个整群随机试验的原始论文进行检查,看其随机设计和单位,以及分析中对聚类效应的调整。然后对每个选定的荟萃分析在聚类效应综合方面进行评估。总共审查了25项符合条件的荟萃分析。其中,15项荟萃分析报告采用固定效应模型的简单传统方法作为分析方法,而6项在综合方法中未纳入整群随机试验结果,而是单独描述了试验结果。3项荟萃分析试图在综合方法中考虑聚类效应,但方法是任意的。15项荟萃分析纳入了不止一项整群随机试验,每项试验都包括随机设计和单位以及分析单位混合的整群随机试验。这些混合情况可能会增加异质性,但在任何荟萃分析中都未被考虑。已经讨论了一些针对某些特定情况处理二元结局的方法。总之,在涉及整群随机试验的荟萃分析中发现了定量综合程序中的一些困难。还提供了在二元结局变量的某些特定情况下应用方法的建议。然而,涉及整群随机试验的荟萃分析仍有若干方法学问题需要进一步研究。