Meta-analysis of prevalence

By J. Barendregt, Suhail A. Doi, Y. Lee, Rosana E Norman, Theo Vos. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 2013

1,939 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Meta-analysis is a method to obtain a weighted average of results from various studies. In addition to pooling effect sizes, meta-analysis can also be used to estimate disease frequencies, such as incidence and prevalence. In this article we present methods for the meta-analysis of prevalence. We discuss the logit and double arcsine transformations to stabilise the variance. We note the special situation of multiple category prevalence, and propose solutions to the problems that arise. We describe the implementation of these methods in the MetaXL software, and present a simulation study and the example of multiple sclerosis from the Global Burden of Disease 2010 project. We conclude that the double arcsine transformation is preferred over the logit, and that the MetaXL implementation of multiple category prevalence is an improvement in the methodology of the meta-analysis of prevalence.

Subfields: Statistics and Probability

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/74b0a9e39374e360aa328f5cffb2bd212811dee9

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Statistics and Probability

Citations in the corpus

Anxiety and depression in adults with autism spectrum disorder: a systematic review and meta-analysis (2018, methodology): “A random-effects meta-analysis with arcsine transformation was used to account for issues with study weightings when estimating prevalence (Barendregt et al., 2013).”
More Than 50 Long-Term Effects of COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (2021, neutral): “Elevated Serum Ferritin 1 12 145 8 (4-14)”
Methodological guidance for systematic reviews of observational epidemiological studies reporting prevalence and cumulative incidence data (2015, methodology): “Meta-analysis can be conducted to determine a single estimate of disease frequency and its variance across studies.(7,14) This has led some to question whether metaanalysis of this type of data is appropriate, as it is likely that studies conducted in different populations will report significantly ”
Psychiatric and neuropsychiatric presentations associated with severe coronavirus infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis with comparison to the COVID-19 pandemic (2020, neutral): “30 For studies using cutoff scores on symptom rating scales, this percentage represents the presence of clinically signifi cant symptoms reflected by the number of patients scoring above the defined cutoff.”
Campus Sexual Assault: A Systematic Review of Prevalence Research From 2000 to 2015 (2018, background): “Although it was not specific to college-based sexual assault, Wilson and Miller (2015) conducted a metaanalysis on the prevalence of unacknowledged rape among survivors of sexual assault.”
Burden of undiagnosed hypertension in sub-saharan Africa: a systematic review and meta-analysis. (2015, methodology): “To assess any undue influence from studies with extreme prevalence estimates, we conducted sensitivity analyses that first stabilized the variance of the study-specific prevalence using the double arcsine transformation before pooling using the random-effects meta-analysis model.(40) All analyses we”