[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date index][Thread index]

From |
Roger Harbord <[email protected]> |

To |
[email protected] |

Subject |
Re: st: meta-regression coefficient - adjusting? |

Date |
Sun, 05 Dec 2004 16:37:08 -0000 |

--On 01 December 2004 14:31 -0500 ronald eysenck <[email protected]> wrote:

--On 03 December 2004 10:14 +0100 "G. ter Riet" <[email protected]> replied:I am performing a meta-regression analysis using 'metareg.' When no covariates are in the model, the intercept should be the exact equivalent of a random-effect pooled estimate calculated with 'meta.' Now, the purpose of these models are: [1] to look at predictors of the effect estimate (or in other words, to ceck if any study-feature makes studies more likely to show a bigger or smaller effect size); [2] ...here is my doubt: how should we interpret the intercept in a metaregression model with covariates? Should it be considered as a pooled estimate adjusted for study-features, the same way we would adjust for confounders, say, in a logistic regression model? I have been taking a look in books and articles on the subject but have not been able so far to come up with a reasonably justified answer.

I'd agree with that. Metaregression examines how the effect varies according to the covariate, it doesn't adjust for the covariate. This is no different from ordinary regression - by regressing y on x you're examining how y varies with x, not adjusting y for x. If y does vary with x it is not very useful to give a single value summarising y for all values of x. The intercept is simply the fitted value of y when x=0 and so isn't of any greater interest than the fitted value of y at any other value of x. That's why the intercept is seldom the focus of interpretation.My understanding is that the intercept in a model with covariates represents the pooled estimate in the subgroup in which all covariates have the value of zero. I do not know a reference on that.

A good reference on how meta-regression analysis should be conducted and interpreted is:

SG Thompson and JPT Higgins, "How should meta-regression analyses be undertaken and interpreted?",Stat Med 2002;21(11):1559-1573

Roger.

--

Roger Harbord

Department of Social Medicine, University of Bristol, UK

http://www.epi.bris.ac.uk

*

* For searches and help try:

* http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/res/findit.html

* http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq

* http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/

- Prev by Date:
**RE: st: RE: stcurve does not allow pweights?** - Next by Date:
**st: RE: lorenz curves using inequal7** - Previous by thread:
**st: meta-regression coefficient - adjusting?** - Next by thread:
**st: Nested ANOVA** - Index(es):

© Copyright 1996–2024 StataCorp LLC | Terms of use | Privacy | Contact us | What's new | Site index |