Abstract
Systematic review and meta-analysis and other forms of evidence syntheses are critical to inform guideline development and healthcare decision-making. Various software is available now a days to conduct meta-analysis. Some of them are code-based, few are not freely available, and some others have obvious limitations. SPSS is the most commonly used statistical package and has a graphical user interface making it user friendly. A recent version (v29) of SPSS has introduced the functionality for meta-analysis. This paper aims to provide a comprehensive and clear guide to public health, clinicians, and allied health professionals to perform and report a meta-analysis using SPSS.
We have first briefly explained few key statistical concepts relevant to meta-analysis. Then, we have provided three solved examples for meta-analysis using attached example datasets. We have also provided the interpretation and reporting for these three cases. Next, we have discussed about ancillary cases, and how meta-analysts can deal with other scenarios. Finally, we have provided the developers of SPSS with some suggestions for improvements and enhancement for incorporation in the future versions of this software.
Keywords:
systematic review, systematic review by SPSS, meta-regression, step-by-step guide, funnel plot, egger’s regression, harbord’s test, peter’s test, bubble plotReferences
Sharp MK, Baki DABA, Quigley J, Tyner B, Devane D, Mahtani KR, et al. The effectiveness and acceptability of evidence synthesis summary formats for clinical guideline development groups: a mixed-methods systematic review. Implementation Science. 2022;17(1):74.
Kabir R, Hayhoe R, Bai ACM, Vinnakota D, Sivasubramanian M, Afework S, et al. The systematic literature review process: a simple guide for public health and allied health students. International Journal of Research in Medical Sciences. 2023;11(9):3498-506.
Haidich AB. Meta-analysis in medical research. Hippokratia. 2010;14(Suppl 1):29-37.
Gurevitch J, Koricheva J, Nakagawa S, Stewart G. Meta-analysis and the science of research synthesis. Nature. 2018;555(7695):175-82.
Tatsioni A, Ioannidis JPA. Meta-analysis. In: Quah SR, editor. International Encyclopedia of Public Health (Second Edition). Second Edition ed. Oxford: Academic Press; 2017. p. 117-24.
Ding W, Li J, Ma H, Wu Y, He H. Science Mapping of Meta-Analysis in Agricultural Science. Information. 2023;14(11).
Allison DB, Gorman BS. Calculating effect sizes for meta-analysis: The case of the single case∗. Behaviour Research and Therapy. 1993;31(6):621-31.
Hansen C, Steinmetz H, Block J. How to conduct a meta-analysis in eight steps: a practical guide. Management Review Quarterly. 2022;72(1):1-19.
Gandhi AP, Shamim MA, Padhi BK. Steps in undertaking meta-analysis and addressing heterogeneity in meta-analysis. The Evidence. 2023;1(01).
IntHout J, Ioannidis JPA, Rovers MM, Goeman JJ. Plea for routinely presenting prediction intervals in meta-analysis. BMJ open. 2016;6(7):e010247-e.
Shamim MA, Gandhi AP, Dwivedi P, Padhi BK. How to perform meta-analysis in R: A simple yet comprehensive guide. The Evidence. 2023;1(01).
Barker TH, Migliavaca CB, Stein C, Colpani V, Falavigna M, Aromataris E, et al. Conducting proportional meta-analysis in different types of systematic reviews: a guide for synthesisers of evidence. BMC Medical Research Methodology. 2021;21(1):189-.
Andrade C. Mean Difference, Standardized Mean Difference (SMD), and Their Use in Meta-Analysis: As Simple as It Gets. The Journal of clinical psychiatry. 2020;81(5).
Sahai H, Khurshid A. Statistics in Epidemiology: Methods, Techniques and Applications: Taylor & Francis; 1995.
STATA META-ANALYSIS REFERENCE MANUAL RELEASE 18. Report No.: 1597183903.
Chaimani A, Caldwell DM, Li T, Higgins JPT, Salanti G. Undertaking network meta-analyses. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd; 2019. p. 285-320.
Huedo-Medina TB, Sánchez-Meca J, Marín-Martínez F, Botella J. Assessing heterogeneity in meta-analysis: Q statistic or I 2 Index? Psychological Methods. 2006;11(2):193-206.
Borenstein M. Avoiding common mistakes in meta‐analysis: Understanding the distinct roles of Q, I‐squared, tau‐squared, and the prediction interval in reporting heterogeneity. Research Synthesis Methods. 2023.
Lin L, Chu H, Hodges JS. Alternative measures of between-study heterogeneity in meta-analysis: Reducing the impact of outlying studies. Biometrics. 2017;73(1):156-66.
Higgins JPT, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, Altman DG. Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ. 2003;327(7414):557-.
Borenstein M, Higgins JPT, Hedges LV, Rothstein HR. Basics of meta-analysis: I2 is not an absolute measure of heterogeneity. Research synthesis methods. 2017;8(1):5-18.
Borenstein M. How to understand and report heterogeneity in a meta-analysis: The difference between I-squared and prediction intervals. Integrative Medicine Research. 2023.
Shamim MA. Real-life implications of prevalence meta-analyses? Doi plots and prediction intervals are the answer. Lancet Microbe. 2023;4(7):e490.
Anil A, Shamim MA, Saravanan A, Sandeep M. HPV DNA and p16(INK4a) positivity in vulvar cancer and vulvar intraepithelial neoplasia. Lancet Oncol. 2023;24(6):e235.
Shamim MA, Dwivedi P, Padhi BK. Beyond the funnel plot: The advantages of Doi plots and prediction intervals in meta-analyses. Asian J Psychiatr. 2023;84:103550.
Brydges CR. Effect Size Guidelines, Sample Size Calculations, and Statistical Power in Gerontology. Innovation in Aging. 2019;3(4):igz036-igz.
Sedgwick P. What is publication bias in a meta-analysis? BMJ. 2015;351.
Silver NC, Dunlap WP. Averaging correlation coefficients: Should Fisher's z transformation be used? Journal of Applied Psychology. 1987;72(1):146-8.
Cummings P. The relative merits of risk ratios and odds ratios. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2009;163(5):438-45.
Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Kunz R, Vist GE, Falck-Ytter Y, Schunemann HJ, et al. What is "quality of evidence" and why is it important to clinicians? BMJ. 2008;336(7651):995-8.
Balduzzi S, Rücker G, Schwarzer G. How to perform a meta-analysis with R: a practical tutorial. Evidence-based mental health. 2019;22(4):153-60.
Sterne JAC, Sutton AJ, Ioannidis JPA, Terrin N, Jones DR, Lau J, et al. Recommendations for examining and interpreting funnel plot asymmetry in meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials. Bmj. 2011;343(jul22 1):d4002-d.
The Cochrane C. Recommendations on testing for funnel plot asymmetry. In: Higgins JPT, Green S, editors. 5.1.0 ed. p. 10.4.3.1-.4.3.1.
Furuya-Kanamori L, Barendregt JJ, Doi SAR. A new improved graphical and quantitative method for detecting bias in meta-analysis. International journal of evidence-based healthcare. 2018;16(4):195-203.
McNeish D. On Using Bayesian Methods to Address Small Sample Problems. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal. 2016;23(5):750-73.
Williams DR, Rast P, Bürkner P-C. Bayesian Meta-Analysis with Weakly Informative Prior Distributions. PsyArXiv. 2010.
How to Cite
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Russell Kabir, Kizhessery Rahna, Manav Jain, Aravind P Gandhi, Muhammad Aaqib Shamim, Shoban Babu Varthya, Surjit Singh, Pradeep Dwivedi, Haniya Zehra Syed, Richard Hayhoe, Ali Davod Parsa, Madhini Sivasubramanian, Masoud Mohammadnezhad, Brijesh Sathian
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Copyright© by the author(s). Published by the Evidence Journals. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.
Most read articles by the same author(s)
- Aravind P Gandhi, Muhammad Aaqib Shamim, Bijaya Kumar Padhi, Steps in undertaking meta-analysis and addressing heterogeneity in meta-analysis , The Evidence: Vol. 1 No. 1 (2023): OCT - DEC
- Muhammad Aaqib Shamim, Aravind P Gandhi, Pradeep Dwivedi, Bijaya Kumar Padhi, How to perform meta-analysis in R: a simple yet comprehensive guide , The Evidence: Vol. 1 No. 1 (2023): OCT - DEC
- Meenu Singh, Joseph L. Mathew, Ranjit Sah, Celso Augusto Guimarães Santos, Adnan Kisa, Alfonso J. Rodríguez-Morales, Ashish Joshi, Jagdish Khubchandani, Jugal Kishore, Roy Rillera Marzo, Atin Adhikari, Abdulai Abubakari, Aditya Singh, Ahmad Neyazi, Aroop Mohanty, Russell Kabir, Vasso Apostolopoulos, Abhishek Mewara, Aravind P Gandhi, Bijaya K Padhi, Navigating the future of academic publishing: mission and vision of "The Evidence" , The Evidence: Vol. 1 No. 1 (2023): OCT - DEC
- Ancy Chandrababu Mercy Bai, Divya Vinnakota, Abu Rushd Mohammad Mashrur, Sumana Choudhury, Ajoy Kumer Ghosh, Russell Kabir, An evaluation of the safety of blood product transfusion in children under 18: systematic review , The Evidence: Vol. 1 No. 1 (2023): OCT - DEC
