Guidelines for application of meta-analysis in environmental epidemiology

A. Blair, J. Burg, J. Foran, H. Gibb, S. Greenland, R. Morris, G. Raabe, D. Savitz, J. Teta, D. Wartenberg, O. Wong, R. Zimmerman

Research output: Contribution to journalShort survey

Abstract

The use of meta-analysis in environmental epidemiology can enhance the value of epidemiologic data in debates about environmental health risks. Meta-analysis may be particularly useful to formally examine sources of heterogeneity, to clarify the relationship between environmental exposures and health effects, and to generate information beyond that provided by individual studies or a narrative review. However, meta-analysis may not be useful when the relationship between exposure and disease is obvious, when there are only a few studies of the key health outcomes, or when there is substantial confounding or other biases which cannot be adjusted for in the analysis. Recent increases in the use of meta-analysis in environmental epidemiology have highlighted the need for guidelines for the application of the technique. Guidelines, in the form of desirable and undesirable attributes, are presented in this paper for various components of a meta-analysis including study identification and selection; data extraction and analysis; and interpretation, presentation, and communication of results. Also discussed are the appropriateness of the use of meta-analysis in environmental health studies and when meta-analysis should or should not be used.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)189-197
Number of pages9
JournalRegulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology
Volume22
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - 1995

Fingerprint

Epidemiology
Meta-Analysis
Health
Guidelines
Environmental Health
Health risks
Communication
Environmental Exposure

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Toxicology

Cite this

Guidelines for application of meta-analysis in environmental epidemiology. / Blair, A.; Burg, J.; Foran, J.; Gibb, H.; Greenland, S.; Morris, R.; Raabe, G.; Savitz, D.; Teta, J.; Wartenberg, D.; Wong, O.; Zimmerman, R.

In: Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology, Vol. 22, No. 2, 1995, p. 189-197.

Research output: Contribution to journalShort survey

Blair, A, Burg, J, Foran, J, Gibb, H, Greenland, S, Morris, R, Raabe, G, Savitz, D, Teta, J, Wartenberg, D, Wong, O & Zimmerman, R 1995, 'Guidelines for application of meta-analysis in environmental epidemiology', Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 189-197. https://doi.org/10.1006/rtph.1995.1084
Blair, A. ; Burg, J. ; Foran, J. ; Gibb, H. ; Greenland, S. ; Morris, R. ; Raabe, G. ; Savitz, D. ; Teta, J. ; Wartenberg, D. ; Wong, O. ; Zimmerman, R. / Guidelines for application of meta-analysis in environmental epidemiology. In: Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology. 1995 ; Vol. 22, No. 2. pp. 189-197.
@article{070e9b0711ec433ea74c4eeb761f423c,
title = "Guidelines for application of meta-analysis in environmental epidemiology",
abstract = "The use of meta-analysis in environmental epidemiology can enhance the value of epidemiologic data in debates about environmental health risks. Meta-analysis may be particularly useful to formally examine sources of heterogeneity, to clarify the relationship between environmental exposures and health effects, and to generate information beyond that provided by individual studies or a narrative review. However, meta-analysis may not be useful when the relationship between exposure and disease is obvious, when there are only a few studies of the key health outcomes, or when there is substantial confounding or other biases which cannot be adjusted for in the analysis. Recent increases in the use of meta-analysis in environmental epidemiology have highlighted the need for guidelines for the application of the technique. Guidelines, in the form of desirable and undesirable attributes, are presented in this paper for various components of a meta-analysis including study identification and selection; data extraction and analysis; and interpretation, presentation, and communication of results. Also discussed are the appropriateness of the use of meta-analysis in environmental health studies and when meta-analysis should or should not be used.",
author = "A. Blair and J. Burg and J. Foran and H. Gibb and S. Greenland and R. Morris and G. Raabe and D. Savitz and J. Teta and D. Wartenberg and O. Wong and R. Zimmerman",
year = "1995",
doi = "10.1006/rtph.1995.1084",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "22",
pages = "189--197",
journal = "Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology",
issn = "0273-2300",
publisher = "Academic Press Inc.",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Guidelines for application of meta-analysis in environmental epidemiology

AU - Blair, A.

AU - Burg, J.

AU - Foran, J.

AU - Gibb, H.

AU - Greenland, S.

AU - Morris, R.

AU - Raabe, G.

AU - Savitz, D.

AU - Teta, J.

AU - Wartenberg, D.

AU - Wong, O.

AU - Zimmerman, R.

PY - 1995

Y1 - 1995

N2 - The use of meta-analysis in environmental epidemiology can enhance the value of epidemiologic data in debates about environmental health risks. Meta-analysis may be particularly useful to formally examine sources of heterogeneity, to clarify the relationship between environmental exposures and health effects, and to generate information beyond that provided by individual studies or a narrative review. However, meta-analysis may not be useful when the relationship between exposure and disease is obvious, when there are only a few studies of the key health outcomes, or when there is substantial confounding or other biases which cannot be adjusted for in the analysis. Recent increases in the use of meta-analysis in environmental epidemiology have highlighted the need for guidelines for the application of the technique. Guidelines, in the form of desirable and undesirable attributes, are presented in this paper for various components of a meta-analysis including study identification and selection; data extraction and analysis; and interpretation, presentation, and communication of results. Also discussed are the appropriateness of the use of meta-analysis in environmental health studies and when meta-analysis should or should not be used.

AB - The use of meta-analysis in environmental epidemiology can enhance the value of epidemiologic data in debates about environmental health risks. Meta-analysis may be particularly useful to formally examine sources of heterogeneity, to clarify the relationship between environmental exposures and health effects, and to generate information beyond that provided by individual studies or a narrative review. However, meta-analysis may not be useful when the relationship between exposure and disease is obvious, when there are only a few studies of the key health outcomes, or when there is substantial confounding or other biases which cannot be adjusted for in the analysis. Recent increases in the use of meta-analysis in environmental epidemiology have highlighted the need for guidelines for the application of the technique. Guidelines, in the form of desirable and undesirable attributes, are presented in this paper for various components of a meta-analysis including study identification and selection; data extraction and analysis; and interpretation, presentation, and communication of results. Also discussed are the appropriateness of the use of meta-analysis in environmental health studies and when meta-analysis should or should not be used.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0028802284&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0028802284&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1006/rtph.1995.1084

DO - 10.1006/rtph.1995.1084

M3 - Short survey

C2 - 8577954

AN - SCOPUS:0028802284

VL - 22

SP - 189

EP - 197

JO - Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology

JF - Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology

SN - 0273-2300

IS - 2

ER -