Burke, DL, Ensor, J and Riley, RD (2016) Meta-analysis using individual participant data: one-stage and two-stage approaches, and why they may differ. Statistics in Medicine, 36 (5). pp. 855-875. ISSN 1097-0258

[thumbnail of R Riley - Meta-analysis using individual participant data - one stage and two stage approaches....pdf]
R Riley - Meta-analysis using individual participant data - one stage and two stage approaches....pdf - Published Version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution.

Download (503kB) | Preview


Meta-analysis using individual participant data (IPD) obtains and synthesises the raw, participant-level data from a set of relevant studies. The IPD approach is becoming an increasingly popular tool as an alternative to traditional aggregate data meta-analysis, especially as it avoids reliance on published results and provides an opportunity to investigate individual-level interactions, such as treatment-effect modifiers. There are two statistical approaches for conducting an IPD meta-analysis: one-stage and two-stage. The one-stage approach analyses the IPD from all studies simultaneously, for example, in a hierarchical regression model with random effects. The two-stage approach derives aggregate data (such as effect estimates) in each study separately and then combines these in a traditional meta-analysis model. There have been numerous comparisons of the one-stage and two-stage approaches via theoretical consideration, simulation and empirical examples, yet there remains confusion regarding when each approach should be adopted, and indeed why they may differ. In this tutorial paper, we outline the key statistical methods for one-stage and two-stage IPD meta-analyses, and provide 10 key reasons why they may produce different summary results. We explain that most differences arise because of different modelling assumptions, rather than the choice of one-stage or two-stage itself. We illustrate the concepts with recently published IPD meta-analyses, summarise key statistical software and provide recommendations for future IPD meta-analyses. © 2016 The Authors. Statistics in Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Item Type: Article
Additional Information: This is the accepted author manuscript (AAM). The final published version (version of record) is available online via Wiley at https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.7141 Please refer to any applicable terms of use of the publisher.
Uncontrolled Keywords: individual patient data, individual participant data, meta‐analysis, IPD, one‐stage, two‐stage
R Medicine > RA Public aspects of medicine

Divisions: Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences > Primary Care Health Sciences
Related URLs:
Depositing User: Symplectic
Date Deposited: 10 Nov 2016 10:58
Last Modified: 01 Apr 2021 10:27
URI: https://eprints.keele.ac.uk/id/eprint/2457

Actions (login required)

View Item
View Item