Estimating reference intervals from an IPD meta-analysis using quantile regression.

IF 3.9 3区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES BMC Medical Research Methodology Pub Date : 2024-10-26 DOI:10.1186/s12874-024-02378-0
Ziren Jiang, Haitao Chu, Zhen Wang, M Hassan Murad, Lianne K Siegel
{"title":"Estimating reference intervals from an IPD meta-analysis using quantile regression.","authors":"Ziren Jiang, Haitao Chu, Zhen Wang, M Hassan Murad, Lianne K Siegel","doi":"10.1186/s12874-024-02378-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Reference intervals, which define an interval in which a specific proportion of measurements from a healthy population are expected to fall, are commonly used in medical practice. Synthesizing information from multiple studies through meta-analysis can provide a more precise and representative reference interval than one derived from a single study. However, the current approaches for estimating the reference interval from a meta-analysis mainly rely on aggregate data and require parametric distributional assumptions that cannot always be checked.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>With the availability of individual participant data (IPD), non-parametric methods can be used to estimate reference intervals without any distributional assumptions. Furthermore, patient-level covariates can be introduced to estimate personalized reference intervals that may be more applicable to specific patients. This paper introduces quantile regression as a method to estimate the reference interval from an IPD meta-analysis under the fixed effects model.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We compared several non-parametric bootstrap methods through simulation studies to account for within-study correlation. Under fixed effects model, we recommend keeping the studies fixed and only randomly sampling subjects with replacement within each study.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>We proposed to use the quantile regression in the IPD meta-analysis to estimate the reference interval. Based on the simulation results, we identify an optimal bootstrap strategy for estimating the uncertainty of the estimated reference interval. An example of liver stiffness measurements, a clinically important diagnostic test without explicitly established reference range in children, is provided to demonstrate the use of quantile regression in estimating both overall and subject-specific reference intervals.</p>","PeriodicalId":9114,"journal":{"name":"BMC Medical Research Methodology","volume":"24 1","pages":"251"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11514908/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Medical Research Methodology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-024-02378-0","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Reference intervals, which define an interval in which a specific proportion of measurements from a healthy population are expected to fall, are commonly used in medical practice. Synthesizing information from multiple studies through meta-analysis can provide a more precise and representative reference interval than one derived from a single study. However, the current approaches for estimating the reference interval from a meta-analysis mainly rely on aggregate data and require parametric distributional assumptions that cannot always be checked.

Methods: With the availability of individual participant data (IPD), non-parametric methods can be used to estimate reference intervals without any distributional assumptions. Furthermore, patient-level covariates can be introduced to estimate personalized reference intervals that may be more applicable to specific patients. This paper introduces quantile regression as a method to estimate the reference interval from an IPD meta-analysis under the fixed effects model.

Results: We compared several non-parametric bootstrap methods through simulation studies to account for within-study correlation. Under fixed effects model, we recommend keeping the studies fixed and only randomly sampling subjects with replacement within each study.

Conclusion: We proposed to use the quantile regression in the IPD meta-analysis to estimate the reference interval. Based on the simulation results, we identify an optimal bootstrap strategy for estimating the uncertainty of the estimated reference interval. An example of liver stiffness measurements, a clinically important diagnostic test without explicitly established reference range in children, is provided to demonstrate the use of quantile regression in estimating both overall and subject-specific reference intervals.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
利用量子回归从 IPD 元分析中估算参考区间。
背景:参考区间是指健康人群中某一特定比例的测量值预计落在其中的区间,常用于医疗实践中。通过荟萃分析综合多项研究的信息,可以提供比单项研究更精确、更有代表性的参考区间。然而,目前从荟萃分析中估算参考区间的方法主要依赖于总体数据,并且需要参数分布假设,而这些假设并非总能得到验证:方法:有了个体参与者数据(IPD),就可以使用非参数方法估算参考区间,而无需任何分布假设。此外,还可以引入患者层面的协变量来估计个性化的参考区间,这样可能更适用于特定患者。本文介绍了一种量子回归方法,用于估计固定效应模型下 IPD 元分析的参考区间:我们通过模拟研究比较了几种非参数引导方法,以考虑研究内部的相关性。在固定效应模型下,我们建议将研究固定下来,只在每个研究中随机抽样替换受试者:我们建议在 IPD 元分析中使用量化回归来估计参考区间。根据模拟结果,我们确定了估算参考区间不确定性的最佳引导策略。肝脏僵硬度测量是一种临床上重要的诊断测试,在儿童中没有明确的参考范围,本研究以肝僵硬度测量为例,展示了量化回归在估计总体和特定受试者参考区间中的应用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
BMC Medical Research Methodology
BMC Medical Research Methodology 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
2.50%
发文量
298
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Medical Research Methodology is an open access journal publishing original peer-reviewed research articles in methodological approaches to healthcare research. Articles on the methodology of epidemiological research, clinical trials and meta-analysis/systematic review are particularly encouraged, as are empirical studies of the associations between choice of methodology and study outcomes. BMC Medical Research Methodology does not aim to publish articles describing scientific methods or techniques: these should be directed to the BMC journal covering the relevant biomedical subject area.
期刊最新文献
Non-collapsibility and built-in selection bias of period-specific and conventional hazard ratio in randomized controlled trials. Exploring the characteristics, methods and reporting of systematic reviews with meta-analyses of time-to-event outcomes: a meta-epidemiological study. The role of the estimand framework in the analysis of patient-reported outcomes in single-arm trials: a case study in oncology. Cardinality matching versus propensity score matching for addressing cluster-level residual confounding in implantable medical device and surgical epidemiology: a parametric and plasmode simulation study. Establishing a machine learning dementia progression prediction model with multiple integrated data.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1