We're unable to sign you in at this time. Please try again in a few minutes.
We were able to sign you in, but your subscription(s) could not be found. Please try again in a few minutes.
There may be a problem with your account. Please contact the AMA Service Center to resolve this issue.
Contact the AMA Service Center:
Telephone: 1 (800) 262-2350 or 1 (312) 670-7827  *   Email: subscriptions@jamanetwork.com
Error Message ......
Comment & Response |

Assessment of Heterogeneity in Meta-analyses—Reply

Agnes Dechartres, MD, PhD1; Ludovic Trinquart, PhD2; Philippe Ravaud, MD, PhD1
[+] Author Affiliations
1Centre de Recherche Epidémiologie et Statistique, Paris, France
2Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, New York
JAMA. 2014;312(21):2287. doi:10.1001/jama.2014.14349.
Text Size: A A A
Published online


In Reply Dr Hoaglin raises several points regarding the statistical methods used in our study. However, his concerns are general criticisms of usual statistical methods in meta-analyses and do not directly address our primary objective—assessing the association between analytic strategy and estimates of treatment outcomes—nor do they provide any counteracting scientific interpretation of our message.

Hoaglin comments on 3 choices for conducting meta-analyses: the use of the DerSimonian-Laird estimator of the between-trial variance, the use of a continuity correction to deal with zero-cell trials, and the use of the Q statistic. Because these choices are the same for all analytic strategies we compared, it is unlikely that they explain the differences observed between these analytic strategies or bias our conclusions in any way.


Sign in

Purchase Options

• Buy this article
• Subscribe to the journal
• Rent this article ?

First Page Preview

View Large
First page PDF preview




December 3, 2014
David C. Hoaglin, PhD
1Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, Massachusetts
JAMA. 2014;312(21):2286-2287. doi:10.1001/jama.2014.14346.
Also Meets CME requirements for:
Browse CME for all U.S. States
Accreditation Information
The American Medical Association is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education to provide continuing medical education for physicians. The AMA designates this journal-based CME activity for a maximum of 1 AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM per course. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity. Physicians who complete the CME course and score at least 80% correct on the quiz are eligible for AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM.
Note: You must get at least of the answers correct to pass this quiz.
Please click the checkbox indicating that you have read the full article in order to submit your answers.
Your answers have been saved for later.
You have not filled in all the answers to complete this quiz
The following questions were not answered:
Sorry, you have unsuccessfully completed this CME quiz with a score of
The following questions were not answered correctly:
Commitment to Change (optional):
Indicate what change(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Your quiz results:
The filled radio buttons indicate your responses. The preferred responses are highlighted
For CME Course: A Proposed Model for Initial Assessment and Management of Acute Heart Failure Syndromes
Indicate what changes(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.


Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

0 Citations

Sign in

Purchase Options

• Buy this article
• Subscribe to the journal
• Rent this article ?

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.

See Also...