» Articles » PMID: 33864652

Estimating the Reference Interval from a Fixed Effects Meta-analysis

Overview
Date 2021 Apr 17
PMID 33864652
Citations 3
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

A reference interval provides a basis for physicians to determine whether a measurement is typical of a healthy individual. It can be interpreted as a prediction interval for a new individual from the overall population. However, a reference interval based on a single study may not be representative of the broader population. Meta-analysis can provide a general reference interval based on the overall population by combining results from multiple studies. Methods for estimating the reference interval from a random effects meta-analysis have been recently proposed to incorporate the within and between-study variation, but a random effects model may give imprecise estimates of the between-study variation with only few studies. In addition, the normal distribution of underlying study-specific means, and equal within-study variance assumption in these methods may be inappropriate in some settings. In this article, we aim to estimate the reference interval based on the fixed effects model assuming study effects are unrelated, which is useful for a meta-analysis with only a few studies (e.g., ≤5). We propose a mixture distribution method only assuming parametric distributions (e.g., normal) for individuals within each study and integrating them to form the overall population distribution. This method is compared to an empirical method only assuming a parametric overall population distribution. Simulation studies have shown that both methods can estimate a reference interval with coverage close to the targeted value (i.e., 95%). Meta-analyses of women daytime urination frequency and frontal subjective postural vertical measurements are reanalyzed to demonstrate the application of our methods.

Citing Articles

Estimating reference intervals from an IPD meta-analysis using quantile regression.

Jiang Z, Chu H, Wang Z, Murad M, Siegel L BMC Med Res Methodol. 2024; 24(1):251.

PMID: 39462323 PMC: 11514908. DOI: 10.1186/s12874-024-02378-0.


An improved Bayesian approach to estimating the reference interval from a meta-analysis: Directly monitoring the marginal quantiles and characterizing their uncertainty.

Siegel L, Chu H Res Synth Methods. 2023; 14(4):639-646.

PMID: 36738156 PMC: 10886429. DOI: 10.1002/jrsm.1624.


RIMeta: An R shiny tool for estimating the reference interval from a meta-analysis.

Jiang Z, Cao W, Chu H, Bazerbachi F, Siegel L Res Synth Methods. 2023; 14(3):468-478.

PMID: 36725922 PMC: 10164051. DOI: 10.1002/jrsm.1626.

References
1.
DerSimonian R, Laird N . Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials. 1986; 7(3):177-88. DOI: 10.1016/0197-2456(86)90046-2. View

2.
Luo D, Wan X, Liu J, Tong T . Optimally estimating the sample mean from the sample size, median, mid-range, and/or mid-quartile range. Stat Methods Med Res. 2016; 27(6):1785-1805. DOI: 10.1177/0962280216669183. View

3.
Barra J, Marquer A, Joassin R, Reymond C, Metge L, Chauvineau V . Humans use internal models to construct and update a sense of verticality. Brain. 2010; 133(Pt 12):3552-63. DOI: 10.1093/brain/awq311. View

4.
Venner A, Doyle-Baker P, Lyon M, Fung T . A meta-analysis of leptin reference ranges in the healthy paediatric prepubertal population. Ann Clin Biochem. 2008; 46(Pt 1):65-72. DOI: 10.1258/acb.2008.008168. View

5.
Cornell J, Mulrow C, Localio R, Stack C, Meibohm A, Guallar E . Random-effects meta-analysis of inconsistent effects: a time for change. Ann Intern Med. 2014; 160(4):267-70. DOI: 10.7326/M13-2886. View