Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
Volume 61, Issue 9 , Pages 857-865, September 2008

Attention should be given to multiplicity issues in systematic reviews

  • Ralf Bender

      Affiliations

    • Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care, Dillenburger Street 27, Cologne D-51105, Germany
    • Faculty of Medicine, University of Cologne, Joseph-Stelzmann-Street 20, Cologne D-50931, Germany
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author. Department of Medical Biometry, Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care, Dillenburger Street 27, D–51105 Cologne, Germany. Tel.: +49-221-35685-451; fax: +49-221-35685-891.
  • ,
  • Catey Bunce

      Affiliations

    • Research & Development, Moorfields Eye Hospital, City Road, London EC1V 2PD, UK
  • ,
  • Mike Clarke

      Affiliations

    • UK Cochrane Centre, Summertown Pavilion, Middle Way, Oxford OX2 7LG, UK
  • ,
  • Simon Gates

      Affiliations

    • Warwick Clinical Trials Unit, Warwick Medical School, Coventry CV4 7AL, UK
  • ,
  • Stefan Lange

      Affiliations

    • Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care, Dillenburger Street 27, Cologne D-51105, Germany
  • ,
  • Nathan L. Pace

      Affiliations

    • Department of Anesthesiology, University of Utah, 30 North 1900 East, Salt Lake City, Utah 84132, USA
  • ,
  • Kristian Thorlund

      Affiliations

    • Copenhagen Trial Unit, Copenhagen University Hospital, Blegdamsvej 9, Copenhagen DK-2100, Denmark

Accepted 7 March 2008.

Abstract 

Objective

The objective of this paper is to describe the problem of multiple comparisons in systematic reviews and to provide some guidelines on how to deal with it in practice.

Study Design and Setting

We describe common reasons for multiplicity in systematic reviews, and present some examples. We provide guidance on how to deal with multiplicity when it is unavoidable.

Results

We identified six common reasons for multiplicity in systematic reviews: multiple outcomes, multiple groups, multiple time points, multiple effect measures, subgroup analyses, and multiple looks at accumulating data. The existing methods to deal with multiplicity in single trials can not always be applied in systematic reviews.

Conclusion

There is no simple and completely satisfactory solution to the problem of multiple comparisons in systematic reviews. More research is required to develop multiple comparison procedures for use in systematic reviews. Authors and consumers of systematic reviews should give serious attention to multiplicity in systematic reviews when presenting, interpreting and using the results of these reports.

Keywords: Cumulative meta-analysis, Meta-analysis, Multiple comparisons, Simultaneous statistical inference, Statistical data interpretation, Systematic reviews

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

PII: S0895-4356(08)00093-0

doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2008.03.004

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
Volume 61, Issue 9 , Pages 857-865, September 2008