MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1097/brs.0b013e31816233b5

Медицинская библиотека · Spine · 2008

Examining heterogeneity in meta-analysis: comparing results of randomized trials and nonrandomized studies of interventions for low back pain.

Furlan Andrea D, Tomlinson George, Jadad Alejandro Alex R, Bombardier Claire

Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяМетаанализПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАОбзорПеревод в очереди

Аннотация

STUDY

DESIGN

Literature review.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the influence of various factors in statistical heterogeneity of meta-analyses of interventions for low back pain. One of these factors was study design: randomized controlled trial (RCT) versus nonrandomized study (NRS).

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The presence of statistical heterogeneity poses a challenge to the conduct and interpretation of meta-analyses.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and The Cochrane Library up to May 2005 for comparative studies of interventions for low back pain. The interventions with the highest number of NRSs were selected. All NRSs and RCTs of the same interventions were combined using meta-analysis. Subgroup analyses and meta-regression were performed according to study design and other factors that were selected by a panel of 20 experts.

RESULTS

NRSs frequently either agree with RCTs or underestimate the effects compared with RCTs. The interventions and the respective factors that explained statistical heterogeneity were a) surgery versus conservative treatments (17 NRSs and 8 RCTs): study design (odds ratio, OR: 1.56 and 4.69 for nonrandomized and randomized studies, respectively), pain duration (OR: 1.75 and 3.55 for chronic and acute, respectively), and involvement of workers' compensation (OR: 1.85 and 5.07, with and without, respectively); b) surgery with fusion versus surgery without fusion (17 NRSs and 3 RCTs): spondylolisthesis (OR: 2.15 and 1.22, with and without, respectively); c) Instrumented fusion versus noninstrumented fusion (15 NRSs and 8 RCTs): previous surgery (OR: 2.89 and 1.36, with and without, respectively) and levels fused (OR: 1.50 and 2.98, single and multilevel, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Comparisons between RCTs and NRSs may be influenced by various factors, including study design. However, other factors were more powerful explanatory variables than study design. These factors included pain duration, involvement of workers' compensation, presence of spondylolisthesis, previous surgery, and levels fused.

Для цитирования: Furlan Andrea D, Tomlinson George, Jadad Alejandro Alex R, Bombardier Claire. Examining heterogeneity in meta-analysis: comparing results of randomized trials and nonrandomized studies of interventions for low back pain.. Spine. 2008. DOI: 10.1097/brs.0b013e31816233b5.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

История · было → стало

Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.