55
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Development and validation of MIX: comprehensive free software for meta-analysis of causal research data

      product-review

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Meta-analysis has become a well-known method for synthesis of quantitative data from previously conducted research in applied health sciences. So far, meta-analysis has been particularly useful in evaluating and comparing therapies and in assessing causes of disease. Consequently, the number of software packages that can perform meta-analysis has increased over the years. Unfortunately, it can take a substantial amount of time to get acquainted with some of these programs and most contain little or no interactive educational material. We set out to create and validate an easy-to-use and comprehensive meta-analysis package that would be simple enough programming-wise to remain available as a free download. We specifically aimed at students and researchers who are new to meta-analysis, with important parts of the development oriented towards creating internal interactive tutoring tools and designing features that would facilitate usage of the software as a companion to existing books on meta-analysis.

          Results

          We took an unconventional approach and created a program that uses Excel as a calculation and programming platform. The main programming language was Visual Basic, as implemented in Visual Basic 6 and Visual Basic for Applications in Excel 2000 and higher. The development took approximately two years and resulted in the 'MIX' program, which can be downloaded from the program's website free of charge. Next, we set out to validate the MIX output with two major software packages as reference standards, namely STATA (metan, metabias, and metatrim) and Comprehensive Meta-Analysis Version 2. Eight meta-analyses that had been published in major journals were used as data sources. All numerical and graphical results from analyses with MIX were identical to their counterparts in STATA and CMA. The MIX program distinguishes itself from most other programs by the extensive graphical output, the click-and-go (Excel) interface, and the educational features.

          Conclusion

          The MIX program is a valid tool for performing meta-analysis and may be particularly useful in educational environments. It can be downloaded free of charge via http://www.mix-for-meta-analysis.info or http://sourceforge.net/projects/meta-analysis.

          Related collections

          Most cited references42

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Cumulative meta-analysis of therapeutic trials for myocardial infarction.

          The large volume of published randomized, controlled trials has led to a need for meta-analyses to track therapeutic advances. Performing a new meta-analysis whenever the results of a new trial of a particular therapy are published permits the study of trends in efficacy and makes it possible to determine when a new treatment appears to be significantly effective or deleterious. We describe the use of such a procedure, cumulative meta-analysis, to assess therapeutic trials among patients with myocardial infarction. We performed cumulative meta-analyses of clinical trials that evaluated 15 treatments and preventive measures for acute myocardial infarction. An example of this method is its application to the use of intravenous streptokinase as thrombolytic therapy for acute infarction. Thirty-three trials evaluating this therapy were performed between 1959 and 1988. We found that a consistent, statistically significant reduction in total mortality (odds ratios, 0.74; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.59 to 0.92) was achieved in 1973, after only eight trials involving 2432 patients had been completed. The results of the 25 subsequent trials, which enrolled an additional 34,542 patients through 1988, had little or no effect on the odds ratio establishing efficacy, but simply narrowed the 95 percent confidence interval. In particular, two very large trials, the Gruppo Italiano per lo Studio della Streptochinasi nell'Infarto Miocardico trial in 1986 (11,712 patients) and the Second International Study of Infarct Survival trial in 1988 (17,187 patients) did not modify the already established evidence of efficacy. We used a similar approach to study the accumulating evidence of efficacy (or lack of efficacy) of 14 other therapies and preventive measures for myocardial infarction. Cumulative meta-analysis of therapeutic trials facilitates the determination of clinical efficacy and harm and may be helpful in tracking trials, planning future trials, and making clinical recommendations for therapy.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            By how much and how quickly does reduction in serum cholesterol concentration lower risk of ischaemic heart disease?

            To estimate by how much and how quickly a given reduction in serum cholesterol concentration will reduce the risk of ischaemic heart disease. Data on the incidence of ischaemic heart disease and serum cholesterol concentration were analysed from 10 prospective (cohort) studies, three international studies in different communities, and 28 randomised controlled trials (with mortality data analysed according to allocated treatment to ensure the avoidance of bias). Decrease in incidence of ischaemic heart disease or mortality for a 0.6 mmol/l (about 10%) decrease in serum cholesterol concentration. For men results from the cohort studies showed that a decrease of serum cholesterol concentration of 0.6 mmol/l (about 10%) was associated with a decrease in incidence of ischaemic heart disease of 54% at age 40 years, 39% at age 50, 27% at 60, 20% at 70, and 19% at 80. The combined estimate from the three international studies (for ages 55-64 years) was 38% (95% confidence interval 33% to 42%), somewhat greater than the cohort study estimate of 27%. The reductions in incidence of ischaemic heart disease in the randomised trials (for ages 55-64 years) were 7% (0 to 14%) in the first two years, 22% (15% to 28%) from 2.1-5 years, and 25% (15% to 35%) after five years, the last estimate being close to the estimate of 27% for the long term reduction from the cohort studies. The data for women are limited but indicate a similar effect. The results from the cohort studies, international comparisons, and clinical trials are remarkably consistent. The cohort studies, based on half a million men and 18,000 ischaemic heart disease events, estimate that a long term reduction in serum cholesterol concentration of 0.6 mmol/l (10%), which can be achieved by moderate dietary change, lowers the risk of ischaemic heart disease by 50% at age 40, falling to 20% at age 70. The randomised trials, based on 45,000 men and 4000 ischaemic heart disease events show that the full effect of the reduction in risk is achieved by five years.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Effect of coronary artery bypass graft surgery on survival: overview of 10-year results from randomised trials by the Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery Trialists Collaboration.

              We carried out a systematic overview using individual patient data from the seven randomised trials that have compared a strategy of initial coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery with one of initial medical therapy to assess the effects on mortality in patients with stable coronary heart disease (stable angina not severe enough to necessitate surgery on grounds of symptoms alone, or myocardial infarction). 1324 patients were assigned CABG surgery and 1325 medical management between 1972 and 1984. The proportion of patients in the medical treatment group who had undergone CABG surgery was 25% at 5 years, 33% at 7 years, and 41% at 10 years: 93.7% of patients assigned to the surgery group underwent CABG surgery. The CABG group had significantly lower mortality than the medical treatment group at 5 years (10.2 vs 15.8%; odds ratio 0.61 [95% CI 0.48-0.77], p = 0.0001), 7 years (15.8 vs 21.7%; 0.68 [0.56-0.83], p < 0.001), and 10 years (26.4 vs 30.5%; 0.83 [0.70-0.98]; p = 0.03). The risk reduction was greater in patients with left main artery disease than in those with disease in three vessels or one or two vessels (odds ratios at 5 years 0.32, 0.58, and 0.77, respectively). Although relative risk reductions in subgroups defined by other baseline characteristics were similar, the absolute benefits of CABG surgery were most pronounced in patients in the highest risk categories. This effect was most evident when several prognostically important clinical and angiographic risk factors were integrated to stratify patients by risk levels and the extension of survival at 10 years was examined (change in survival -1.1 [SE 3.1] months in low-risk group, 5.0 [4.2] months in moderate-risk group, and 8.8 [5.4] months in high-risk group; p for trend < 0.003). A strategy of initial CABG surgery is associated with lower mortality than one of medical management with delayed surgery if necessary, especially in high-risk and medium-risk patients with stable coronary heart disease. In low-risk patients, the limited data show a non-significant trend towards greater mortality with CABG.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                BMC Med Res Methodol
                BMC Medical Research Methodology
                BioMed Central (London )
                1471-2288
                2006
                13 October 2006
                : 6
                : 50
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, UMC Utrecht, The Netherlands
                [2 ]Department of Medical Informatics, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Kitasato University, Japan
                [3 ]Centre for Statistics in Medicine, Oxford, UK
                Article
                1471-2288-6-50
                10.1186/1471-2288-6-50
                1626481
                17038197
                94a8068d-36a7-4d41-ba0e-814c48ea64e5
                Copyright © 2006 Bax et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 22 August 2006
                : 13 October 2006
                Categories
                Software

                Medicine
                Medicine

                Comments

                Comment on this article