|
Overview of the data sets used in the validation |
||||
| # |
Author(s) |
Date |
Studies |
Input type |
|
|
||||
| 1 |
Lau et al. [4] |
1992 |
33 |
DD – large |
| 2 |
Hodnett et al. [29] |
2001 |
5 |
DD – small |
| 3 |
Teo et al. [30] |
1991 |
16 |
DD – publication bias |
| 4 |
Crowley [31] |
2000 |
17 |
DD – rare events |
| 5 |
Lightowler et al. [32] |
2003 |
5 |
DC – small |
| 6 |
Wahlbeck et al. [33] |
2000 |
11 |
DC – medium large |
| 7 |
Pagliaro et al. [34] |
1992 |
19 |
C – odds ratio |
| 8 |
Law et al. [35] |
1994 |
10 |
C – risk difference |
|
The validation was done with eight data sets from meta-analysis that have been published in major peer-reviewed journals. The data sets were selected to represent a wide spectrum of potential input for meta-analysis. Abbreviations: "DD" = descriptive data for dichotomous outcomes (two-by-two table data), "DC" = descriptive data for continuous outcomes (means with their standard deviations and sample sizes), and "C" = comparative data (association measures with standards error or confidence intervals). | ||||
Bax et al. BMC Medical Research Methodology 2006 6:50 doi:10.1186/1471-2288-6-50 |
||||