{"title":"结合荟萃分析与多重归算的一步,在多地点研究中保护隐私的因果治疗效果估计","authors":"Di Shu, Xiaojuan Li, Qoua Her, Jenna Wong, Dongdong Li, Rui Wang, Sengwee Toh","doi":"10.1002/jrsm.1660","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Missing data complicates statistical analyses in multi-site studies, especially when it is not feasible to centrally pool individual-level data across sites. We combined meta-analysis with within-site multiple imputation for one-step estimation of the average causal effect (ACE) of a target population comprised of all individuals from all data-contributing sites within a multi-site distributed data network, without the need for sharing individual-level data to handle missing data. We considered two orders of combination and three choices of weights for meta-analysis, resulting in six approaches. The first three approaches, denoted as RR + metaF, RR + metaR and RR + std, first combined results from imputed data sets within each site using Rubin's rules and then meta-analyzed the combined results across sites using fixed-effect, random-effects and sample-standardization weights, respectively. The last three approaches, denoted as metaF + RR, metaR + RR and std + RR, first meta-analyzed results across sites separately for each imputation and then combined the meta-analysis results using Rubin's rules. Simulation results confirmed very good performance of RR + std and std + RR under various missing completely at random and missing at random settings. A direct application of the inverse-variance weighted meta-analysis based on site-specific ACEs can lead to biased results for the targeted network-wide ACE in the presence of treatment effect heterogeneity by site, demonstrating the need to clearly specify the target population and estimand and properly account for potential site heterogeneity in meta-analyses seeking to draw causal interpretations. An illustration using a large administrative claims database is presented.</p>","PeriodicalId":226,"journal":{"name":"Research Synthesis Methods","volume":"14 5","pages":"742-763"},"PeriodicalIF":5.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Combining meta-analysis with multiple imputation for one-step, privacy-protecting estimation of causal treatment effects in multi-site studies\",\"authors\":\"Di Shu, Xiaojuan Li, Qoua Her, Jenna Wong, Dongdong Li, Rui Wang, Sengwee Toh\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/jrsm.1660\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Missing data complicates statistical analyses in multi-site studies, especially when it is not feasible to centrally pool individual-level data across sites. We combined meta-analysis with within-site multiple imputation for one-step estimation of the average causal effect (ACE) of a target population comprised of all individuals from all data-contributing sites within a multi-site distributed data network, without the need for sharing individual-level data to handle missing data. We considered two orders of combination and three choices of weights for meta-analysis, resulting in six approaches. The first three approaches, denoted as RR + metaF, RR + metaR and RR + std, first combined results from imputed data sets within each site using Rubin's rules and then meta-analyzed the combined results across sites using fixed-effect, random-effects and sample-standardization weights, respectively. The last three approaches, denoted as metaF + RR, metaR + RR and std + RR, first meta-analyzed results across sites separately for each imputation and then combined the meta-analysis results using Rubin's rules. Simulation results confirmed very good performance of RR + std and std + RR under various missing completely at random and missing at random settings. A direct application of the inverse-variance weighted meta-analysis based on site-specific ACEs can lead to biased results for the targeted network-wide ACE in the presence of treatment effect heterogeneity by site, demonstrating the need to clearly specify the target population and estimand and properly account for potential site heterogeneity in meta-analyses seeking to draw causal interpretations. An illustration using a large administrative claims database is presented.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":226,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Research Synthesis Methods\",\"volume\":\"14 5\",\"pages\":\"742-763\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Research Synthesis Methods\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"99\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jrsm.1660\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"生物学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MATHEMATICAL & COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research Synthesis Methods","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jrsm.1660","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MATHEMATICAL & COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Combining meta-analysis with multiple imputation for one-step, privacy-protecting estimation of causal treatment effects in multi-site studies
Missing data complicates statistical analyses in multi-site studies, especially when it is not feasible to centrally pool individual-level data across sites. We combined meta-analysis with within-site multiple imputation for one-step estimation of the average causal effect (ACE) of a target population comprised of all individuals from all data-contributing sites within a multi-site distributed data network, without the need for sharing individual-level data to handle missing data. We considered two orders of combination and three choices of weights for meta-analysis, resulting in six approaches. The first three approaches, denoted as RR + metaF, RR + metaR and RR + std, first combined results from imputed data sets within each site using Rubin's rules and then meta-analyzed the combined results across sites using fixed-effect, random-effects and sample-standardization weights, respectively. The last three approaches, denoted as metaF + RR, metaR + RR and std + RR, first meta-analyzed results across sites separately for each imputation and then combined the meta-analysis results using Rubin's rules. Simulation results confirmed very good performance of RR + std and std + RR under various missing completely at random and missing at random settings. A direct application of the inverse-variance weighted meta-analysis based on site-specific ACEs can lead to biased results for the targeted network-wide ACE in the presence of treatment effect heterogeneity by site, demonstrating the need to clearly specify the target population and estimand and properly account for potential site heterogeneity in meta-analyses seeking to draw causal interpretations. An illustration using a large administrative claims database is presented.
期刊介绍:
Research Synthesis Methods is a reputable, peer-reviewed journal that focuses on the development and dissemination of methods for conducting systematic research synthesis. Our aim is to advance the knowledge and application of research synthesis methods across various disciplines.
Our journal provides a platform for the exchange of ideas and knowledge related to designing, conducting, analyzing, interpreting, reporting, and applying research synthesis. While research synthesis is commonly practiced in the health and social sciences, our journal also welcomes contributions from other fields to enrich the methodologies employed in research synthesis across scientific disciplines.
By bridging different disciplines, we aim to foster collaboration and cross-fertilization of ideas, ultimately enhancing the quality and effectiveness of research synthesis methods. Whether you are a researcher, practitioner, or stakeholder involved in research synthesis, our journal strives to offer valuable insights and practical guidance for your work.