Visitors   Views   Downloads

Bayesian meta-analysis of studies with rare events: Do the choice of prior distributions and the exclusion of studies without events in both arms matter?

View preprint
RT @Xenpaper: Bayesian meta-analysis of studies with rare events: Do the choice of prior distributions and the exclusion of studies without…
4 days ago
Bayesian meta-analysis of studies with rare events: Do the choice of prior distributions and the exclusion of studies without events in both arms matter? https://t.co/UKy38yuzaI https://t.co/07KreWmYNd
NOT PEER-REVIEWED
"PeerJ Preprints" is a venue for early communication or feedback before peer review. Data may be preliminary.

Supplemental Information

Tables included in the manuscript

DOI: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.27732v1/supp-1

Figure 1

Coverage probability of 95% CIs and bias for log(OR) = 0 and log(OR)=0.69 estimate for FE method when trials with no events in both arms were included (bold icons in the graph are scenarios with more than 30% in both arms)

DOI: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.27732v1/supp-2

Figure 2

Coverage probability of 95% CIs and bias for log(OR) estimate for RE method with half-normal(mean= 0.5) prior for statistical heterogeneity and different scenarios of log(OR)

DOI: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.27732v1/supp-3

Figure 3

Coverage probability of 95% CIs and bias for log(OR) estimate for RE method with half-normal(mean= 0.5) prior for statistical heterogeneity for different scenarios of log(OR)

DOI: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.27732v1/supp-4

Figure 4

Forest plot of an MA of Rosiglitazone for MI

DOI: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.27732v1/supp-5

Figure 5

Forrest plot of an MA of Rosiglitazone for CV death

DOI: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.27732v1/supp-6

Supplemental II

JAGS codes for the study

DOI: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.27732v1/supp-7

Supplemental III

R codes for the study

DOI: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.27732v1/supp-8

Supplemental I

Tables and figures for as a supplemental

DOI: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.27732v1/supp-9

Figure S1

Coverage probability of 95% CIs and bias

DOI: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.27732v1/supp-10

Figure S2

Coverage probability of 95% CIs and bias

DOI: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.27732v1/supp-11

Figure S3

Coverage probability of 95% CIs and bias

DOI: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.27732v1/supp-12

Figure S4

Coverage probability of 95% CIs and bias

DOI: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.27732v1/supp-13

Figure S5

Coverage probability of 95% CIs and bias

DOI: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.27732v1/supp-14

Figure S6

Coverage probability of 95% CIs and bias

DOI: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.27732v1/supp-15

Additional Information

Competing Interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Author Contributions

Soheila Aghlmandi conceived and designed the experiments, performed the experiments, analyzed the data, contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools, prepared figures and/or tables, authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, approved the final draft.

Peter Jüni conceived and designed the experiments, contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools, authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, approved the final draft.

James Carpenter contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools, authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, approved the final draft.

Marcel Zwahlen conceived and designed the experiments, performed the experiments, contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools, authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, approved the final draft.

Data Deposition

The following information was supplied regarding data availability:

As a supplemental to the manuscript

Funding

SA is supported by the European Community's Seventh Framework Program FP7/2011: Marie Curie Initial Training Network MEDIASRES ("Novel Statistical Methodology for Diagnostic/Prognostic and Therapeutic Studies and Systematic Reviews", www.mediasres-itn.eu) with the Grant Agreement Number 290025. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.


Add your feedback

Before adding feedback, consider if it can be asked as a question instead, and if so then use the Question tab. Pointing out typos is fine, but authors are encouraged to accept only substantially helpful feedback.

Some Markdown syntax is allowed: _italic_ **bold** ^superscript^ ~subscript~ %%blockquote%% [link text](link URL)
 
By posting this you agree to PeerJ's commenting policies