MRC Biostatistics Unit, Cambridge, UK.
Int J Epidemiol. 2011 Jun;40(3):765-77. doi: 10.1093/ije/dyq248. Epub 2010 Dec 23.
Interpretation of meta-analyses of published observational studies is problematic because of numerous sources of bias. We develop bias assessment, elicitation and adjustment methods, and apply them to a systematic review of longitudinal observational studies of the relationship between objectively measured physical activity and subsequent change in adiposity in children.
We separated internal biases that reflect study quality from external biases that reflect generalizability to a target setting. Since published results were presented in different formats, these were all converted to correlation coefficients. Biases were considered as additive or proportional on the correlation scale. Opinions about the extent of each bias in each study, together with its uncertainty, were elicited in a formal process from quantitatively trained assessors for the internal biases and subject-matter specialists for the external biases. Bias-adjusted results for each study were combined across assessors using median pooling, and results combined across studies by random-effects meta-analysis.
Before adjusting for bias, the pooled correlation is difficult to interpret because the studies varied substantially in quality and design, and there was considerable heterogeneity. After adjusting for both the internal and external biases, the pooled correlation provides a meaningful quantitative summary of all available evidence, and the confidence interval incorporates the elicited uncertainties about the extent of the biases. In the adjusted meta-analysis, there was no apparent heterogeneity.
This approach provides a viable method of bias adjustment for meta-analyses of observational studies, allowing the quantitative synthesis of evidence from otherwise incompatible studies. From the meta-analysis of longitudinal observational studies, we conclude that there is no evidence that physical activity is associated with gain in body fat.
由于存在多种偏倚来源,对已发表观察性研究的荟萃分析进行解释存在问题。我们开发了偏倚评估、 elicitation 和调整方法,并将其应用于一项系统评价,该评价对客观测量的身体活动与儿童肥胖程度后续变化之间的纵向观察性研究进行了荟萃分析。
我们将反映研究质量的内部偏倚与反映可推广到目标环境的一般性的外部偏倚区分开来。由于已发表的结果以不同的格式呈现,因此我们将所有结果都转换为相关系数。偏倚被认为是相关尺度上的加性或比例性的。关于每个研究中每种偏倚的程度及其不确定性的意见,由受过定量培训的评估员针对内部偏倚和主题专家针对外部偏倚,以正式程序进行了征集。使用中位数汇总对每个研究的经过偏倚调整的结果进行了评估员之间的合并,并通过随机效应荟萃分析对来自研究的结果进行了合并。
在进行偏倚调整之前,由于研究在质量和设计上存在很大差异,且存在相当大的异质性,因此难以解释汇总相关性。在调整了内部和外部偏倚之后,汇总相关性为所有可用证据提供了有意义的定量总结,置信区间纳入了对偏倚程度的不确定性的征集。在调整后的荟萃分析中,没有明显的异质性。
这种方法为观察性研究的荟萃分析提供了可行的偏倚调整方法,允许对来自原本不兼容的研究的证据进行定量综合。从纵向观察性研究的荟萃分析中,我们得出的结论是,没有证据表明身体活动与体脂增加有关。