Published in

Wiley, Research Synthesis Methods, 4(14), p. 647-651, 2023

DOI: 10.1002/jrsm.1643

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

The consequences of neglected confounding and interactions in mixed‐effects meta‐regression: An illustrative example

Journal article published in 2023 by Eric S. Knop ORCID, Markus Pauly ORCID, Tim Friede ORCID, Thilo Welz ORCID
This paper was not found in any repository, but could be made available legally by the author.
This paper was not found in any repository, but could be made available legally by the author.

Full text: Unavailable

Green circle
Preprint: archiving allowed
Orange circle
Postprint: archiving restricted
Red circle
Published version: archiving forbidden
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

AbstractAnalysts seldom include interaction terms in their meta‐regression model, which can introduce bias if an interaction is present. We illustrate this by reanalysing a meta‐regression study in acute heart failure. Based on a total of 285 studies, the 1‐year mortality rate related to acute heart failure is considered and the connection to the study‐level covariates year of recruitment and average age of study participants are of interest. We show that neglecting a possibly confounding variable and an interaction term might lead to erroneous inference and conclusions. Based on our results and accompanying simulations, we recommend to include possible confounders and interaction terms, whenever they are plausible, in mixed‐effects meta‐regression models.