Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Contributions of Meta-Analysis to Transfusion Medicine

  • Chapter
Transfusion Medicine: Quo Vadis? What Has Been Achieved, What Is to Be Expected

Part of the book series: Developments in Hematology and Immunology ((DIHI,volume 36))

  • 91 Accesses

Abstract

Meta-analysis is the structured and systematic integration of information from different studies of a given problem. It refers to the disciplined synthesis of previous research findings where the results of multiple reports on the efficacy of an intervention are compared, contrasted, and re-analyzed. When the results are discrepant, the purpose of the meta-analysis is to investigate the reasons for disagreements among the studies. When the results are concordant, the goal of the overview is to derive, through the application of a number of quantitative techniques, a measure of the effect of the intervention across the combined investigations. This measure is referred to as the ‘average’ or ‘summary’ effectof the treatment under study [1-5].

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Jenicek M. Meta-analysis in medicine: where we are and where we want to go. J Clin Epidemiol 1989; 42:35–44.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. L’Abbé KA, Detsky AS, O’Rourke K. Meta-analysis in clinical research. Ann Intern Med 1987; 107:224–33.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Glass GV, McGraw B, Smith ML. Meta-analysis in social research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications, 1981.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Light RJ, Pillemer DB. Summing up: The science of reviewing research. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Cooper H, Hedges LV, eds. The handbook of research synthesis. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Glass GV. Primary, secondary, and meta-analysis of research. Educ Res 1976; 5:3–8.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Moher D, Olkin I. Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials: a concern for standards. JAMA 1995; 274:1962–64.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Sacks HS, Berner J, Reitman D, Ancona-Berk VA, Chalmers TC. Meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials. N Engl J Med 1987; 316:450–55.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Yusuf S, Simon R, Ellenberg S, eds. Proceedings of “Methodologic Issues in Overviews of Randomized Clinical Trials”. Workshop sponsored by the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute and the National Cancer Institute. Bethesda, MD, 15–16 May, 1986. Stat Med 1987; 6:217–409.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Goodman SN. Have you ever met a meta-analysis you didn’t like? Am Intern Med 1991; 114:244–46.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Goodman SN. Meta-analysis in health services research. In: Armenian HK, Shapiro S, eds. Epidemiology and health services. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 1998:229–59.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Schiffer CA, Dutcher JP, Aisner J, et al. A randomized trial of leukocyte-depleted platelet transfusion to modify alloimmunization in patients with leukemia. Blood 1983; 62:815–20.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Andreu G, Dewailly J, Leberre C, et al. Prevention of HLA immunization with leukocyte-poor packed red cells and platelet concentrates obtained by filtration. Blood 1988; 72:964–69.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Sniecinski I, O’Donnell MR, Nowicki B, et al. Prevention of refractoriness and HLA alloimmunization using filtered blood products. Blood 1988; 71:1402–07.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Oksanen K, Kekomaki R, Ruutu T, et al. Prevention of alloimmunization in patients with acute leukemia by use of white cell-reduced blood components-A randomized trial. Transfusion 1991;31:588–94.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. van Marwijk Kooy M, van Prooijen HC, Moes M, et al. Use of leukocyte-depleted platelet concentrates for the prevention of refractoriness and primary HLA alloimmunization: A prospective, randomized trial. Blood 1991; 77:201–05.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Williamson LM, Wimperis JZ, Williamson P, et al. Bedside filtration of blood products in the prevention of HLA alloimmunization-A prospective, randomized study. Blood 1994; 83:3028–35.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Sintnicolaas K, van Marwijk Kooij M, van Prooijen HC, et al. Leukocyte depletion of random single-donor platelet transfusions does not prevent secondary human leukocyte antigen-alloimmunization and refractoriness: A randomized prospective study. Blood 1995; 85:824–28.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Heddle NM. The efficacy of leukodepletion to improve platelet transfusion response: A critical appraisal of clinical studies. Transf Med Rev 1994; 8:15–28.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Andreu G, Dewailly J. Prevention of HLA alloimmunization by using leukocyte-depleted components. In: Lane TA, Myllyla G, eds. Leukocyte-depleted blood products. Curr Stud Hematol Blood Transf, no. 60. Basel, Switzerland: Karger, 1994: 2940.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Vamvakas EC. Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of the efficacy of white cell reduction in preventing HLA-alloimmunization and refractoriness to random-donor platelet transfusions. Transf Med Rev 1998; 12:258–70.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Wooley AL, Hogikyan ND, Geates GA, Haughney BH, Schechtman KB, Goldenberg JL. Effect of blood transfusion on recurrence of head and neck carcinoma. Retrospective review and meta-analysis. Ann Otol Rhino’ Laryngol 1992; 101:724–30.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Chung M, Steinmetz OK, Gordon PH. Perioperative blood transfusion and outcome after resection for colorectal carcinoma. Br J Surg 1993; 80:427–32.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Amato A, Pescatori M. Perioperative blood transfusion and outcome after resection for colorectal carcinoma. Br J Surg 1994; 81:313–14.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Vamvakas E. Perioperative blood transfusion and cancer recurrence: meta-analysis for explanation. Transfusion 1995; 35:760–68.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Brand A, Houbiers JGA. Clinical studies of blood transfusion and cancer. In: Vamvakas EC, Blajchman MA, eds. Immunomodulatory effects of blood transfusion. Bethesda, MD: American Association of Blood Banks Press, 1999: 145–90.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Busch ORC, Hop WCJ, Hoynek van Papendrecht MAW, Marquet RL, Jeekel J. Blood transfusions and prognosis in colorectal center. N Engl J Med 1993; 328:137276.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Heiss MM, Mempel W, Delanoff C, et al. Blood transfusion-modulated tumor recurrence: first results of a randomized study of autologous versus allogeneic blood transfusion in colorectal cancer surgery. J Clin Oncol 1994; 12:1859–67.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Houbiers JGA, Brand A, van de Watering LMG, et al. Randomized controlled trial comparing transfusion of leukocyte-depleted or buffy-coat-depleted blood in surgery for colorectal cancer. Lancet 1994; 344:573–78.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Jensen LS, Andersen AJ, Christiansen PM, et al. Postoperative infection and natural killer cell function following blood transfusion in patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery. Br J Surg 1992; 79:513–16.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Heiss MM, Mempel W, Jauch KW, et al. Beneficial effect of autologous blood transfusion on infectious complications after colorectal cancer surgery. Lancet 1993; 342:1328–33.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Busch ORC, Hop WCJ, Marquet RL, et al. Autologous blood and infection after colorectal surgery (letter). Lancet 1994; 343:668–69.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Jensen LS, Kissmeyer-Nielsen P, Wolff B, et al. Randomized comparison of leukocyte-depleted versus huffy-coat-poor blood transfusion and complications after colorectal surgery. Lancet 1996; 348:841–45.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. van de Watering LMG, Hermans J, Houbiers JGA, et al. Beneficial effect of leukocyte depletion of transfused blood on postoperative complications in patients undergoing cardiac surgery: A randomized clinical trial. Circulation 1998; 97:562–68.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Tartter PI, Mohandas K, Azar P, et al. Randomized trial comparing packed red blood cell transfusion with and without leukocyte depletion for gastrointestinal surgery. Am J Surg 1998; 176:462–66.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Vamvakas E. Transfusion-associated cancer recurrence and infection: meta-analysis of randomized, controlled clinical trials. Transfusion 1996; 36:175–86.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. McAlister FA, Clark HD, Wells PS, Laupacis A. Perioperative allogeneic blood transfusion does not cause adverse sequelae in patients with cancer: A meta-analysis of unconfounded studies. Br J Surg 1998; 85:71–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Vamvakas EC, Dzik WH, Blajchman MA. Deleterious effects of transfusion-associated immunomodulation: Appraisal of the evidence and recommendations for prevention. In: Vamvakas EC, Blajchman MA, eds. Immunomodulatory effects of blood transfusion. Bethesda, MD: American Association of Blood Banks Press, 1999:253–85.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Cowchock S. What’s a mother to do? Analysis of trials evaluating new treatments for unexplained recurrent miscarriages and other complaints. Am J Reprod Immunol 1991; 26:156–59.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Fraser EJ, Grimes DA, Schulz KF. Immunization as therapy for recurrent spontaneous abortion: a review and meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol 1993; 82:854–59.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. The Recurrent Miscarriage Immunotherapy Trialists Group. Worldwide collaborative observational study and meta-analysis on allogeneic leukocyte immunotherapy for recurrent spontaneous abortion. Am J Reprod Immunol 1994; 32:55–72

    Google Scholar 

  42. Jeng FT, Scott JR, Burmeister LF. A comparison of meta-analytic results using literature vs. individual patient data: paternal cell immunization for recurrent miscarriage. JAMA 1995; 274:830–36.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Hollaar GL, Gooszen HG, Post S, et al. Perioperative blood transfusion does not prevent recurrence in Crohn’s disease. J Clin Gastroenterol 1995; 21:134–38.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Vamvakas EC, Pineda AA. Meta-analysis of clinical studies of the efficacy of granulocyte transfusions in the treatment of bacterial sepsis. J Clin Apheresis 1996; 11:1–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Vamvakas EC, Pineda AA. Determinants of the efficacy of prophylactic granulocyte transfusions: A meta-analysis. J Clin Apheresis 1997; 12:74–81.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Vamvakas EC, Pineda AA, Weinshenker BG. Meta-analysis of clinical studies of the efficacy of plasma exchange in the treatment of chronic progressive multiple sclerosis. J Clin Apheresis 1995; 10:163–70.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Huet C, Salmi LR, Fergusson D, Koopman-van Gemert AW, Rubens F, Laupacis A. A meta-analysis of the effectiveness of cell salvage to minimize perioperative allogeneic blood transfusion in cardiac and orthopedic surgery. Anesth Analg 1999; 89:861–69.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Bryson GL, Laupacis A, Wells GA. Does acute normovolemic hemodilution reduce perioperative allogeneic transfusion? A meta-analysis. Anesth Analg 1998; 86:9–15.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Forgie MA, Wells PS, Laupacis A, Fergusson D. Preoperative autologous donation decreases allogeneic transfusion but increases exposure to all red blood cell transfusion: results of a meta-analysis. Arch Intern Med 1998; 158:610–16.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. Rubens FD, Fergusson D, Wells PS, Huang M, McGowan JL, Laupacis A. Platelet-rich plasmapheresis in cardiac surgery: a meta-analysis of the effect on transfusion requirements. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1998; 116:641–47.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  51. Laupacis A, Fergusson D. Erythropoietin to minimize perioperative blood transfusion: a systematic review of randomized trials. Transfus Med 1998; 8:309–17.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  52. Phillips K. The use of meta-analysis in technology assessment: a meta-analysis of the enzyme immunosorbent assay human immunodeficiency virus antibody test. J Clin Epidemiol 1991; 44:925–31.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  53. Hellstrom-Lindberg E. Efficacy of erythropoietin in the myelodysplastic syndromes: a meta-analysis of 205 patients from 17 studies. Br J Haematol 1995; 89:67–71.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  54. Henry DH, Beall GN, Benson CA, et al. Recombinant human erythropoietin in the treatment of anemia associated with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection and zidovudine therapy. Overview of four clinical trials. Ann Intern Med 1992; 117:739–48.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  55. Pagliaro L, Crazi A, Cammaa C, et al. Interferon-alpha for chronic hepatitis C: an analysis of pretreatment clinical predictors of response. Hepatology 1994; 19:820–28.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  56. Begg CB, Pilotte L, McGlave PB. Bone marrow transplantation versus chemotherapy in acute non-lymphocytic leukemia: a meta-analytic review. Eur J Cancer Clin Oncol 1989;25:1519–23.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  57. Laupacis A, Fergusson D. Drugs to minimize perioperative blood loss in cardiac surgery: meta-analyses using perioperative blood transfusion as the outcome. Anesth Analg 1997; 85:1258–67.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  58. Fleiss JL, Tytum A, Ury HK. A simple approximation for calculating sample sizes for comparing independent proportions. Biometrics 1980; 36:343–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. The Trial to Reduce Alloimmunization to Platelets Study Group. Leukocyte reduction and ultraviolet B irradiation of platelets to prevent alloimmunization and refractoriness to platelet transfusions. N Engl J Med 1997; 337:1681–89.

    Google Scholar 

  60. Vamvakas EC. Multicenter randomized controlled trials in transfusion medicine. Trans Med Rev 2000; 14:137–50.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  61. Freiman JA, Chalmers RC, Smith H Jr, et al. The importance of beta, the type II error and sample size in the design and interpretation of the randomized controlled trial: Survey of 71 “negative” trials. N Engl J Med 1978; 299:690–94.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  62. Passamani E. Clinical trials: are they ethical? N Engl J Med 1991; 324:1589–91.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  63. Hellman S, Hellman DS. Of mice but not men: problems of the randomized clinical trial. N Engl J Med 324:1585–89.

    Google Scholar 

  64. Borzak S, Ridker PM. Discordance between meta-analyses and large-scale randomized controlled trials: examples from the management of acute myocardial infarction. Ann Intern Med 1995; 123:873–77.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  65. Bailar JC III. The promise and problems of meta-analysis. N Engl J Med 1997; 337:559–61.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Meta-analysis under scrutiny. Lancet 1997; 350:675.

    Google Scholar 

  67. Villar J, Carrolli G, Belizan JM. Predictive ability of meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials. Lancet 1995; 345:772–76.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  68. Cappelleri JC, Ioannidis JPA, Schmid CH, et al. Large trials versus meta-analyses of small trials: How do their results compare? JAMA 1996; 276:1332–38.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  69. LeLorier J, Grégoire B, Benhaddad A, et al. Discrepancies between meta-analyses and subsequent large randomized, controlled trials. N Engl J Med 1997; 337:536–42.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  70. Ioannidis JPA, Cappelleri JC, Lau J. Issues in comparisons between meta-analyses and large trials. JAMA 1998; 279:1089–93.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  71. O’Rourke K, Detsky AS. Meta-analysis in medical research: strong encouragement for higher quality in individual research efforts. J Clin Epidemiol 1989; 42:1021–24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Gerbarg ZB, Horowitz RI. Resolving conflicting clinical trials: guidelines for meta-analysis. J Clin Epidemiol 1988; 41:503–09.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  73. Chalmers TC, Smith H Jr, Blackburn B, et al. A method for assessing the quality of a randomized controlled trial. Control Clin Trials 1981; 2:31–49.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  74. Detsky AS, Naylor CD, O’Rourke K, McGeer AJ, L’Abbé KA. Incorporating variations in the quality of individual randomized trials into meta-analysis. J Clin Epidemiol 1992; 45:255–65.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  75. Zelen M. Guidelines for publishing papers on cancer clinical trials: responsibilities of editors and authors. J Clin Oncol 1983; 1:164–69.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  76. Moher D, Jadad AR, Nichol G, Penman M, Tugwell P, Walsh S. Assessing the quality of randomized controlled trials: An annotated bibliography of scales and checklists. Control Clin Trials 1995; 16:62–73.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  77. Moher D, Jadad AR, Tugwell P. Assessing the quality of reports of randomized trials. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 1996; 12:195–208.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  78. Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carroll D, et al. Assessing the quality of reports of randomized trials: Is blinding necessary? Control Clin Trials 1996; 17:1–12.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  79. Moher D, Jones BA, Cook DJ, et al. Does quality of reports of randomized trials affect estimates of intervention efficacy reported in meta-analyses? Lancet 1998; 352:609–13.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  80. Sackett DL. Bias in analytic research. J Chron Dis 1979; 32:51–63.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  81. Miettinen OS, Cook EF. Confounding: Essence and detection. Am J Epidemiol 1981; 114: 593–603.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  82. Schultz KF, Chalmers I, Hayes RJ, et al. Empirical evidence of bias: Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials. JAMA 1995; 273:408–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  83. Huskisson EC, Scott J. How blind is double-blind? And does it matter? Br J Clin Pharmacol 1976; 3:331–32.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  84. Pocock SJ, Lagakos SW. Practical experience of randomization in cancer trials: An international survey. Br J Cancer 1982; 46:368–75.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  85. Chalmers TC, Celano P, Sacks HS, et al. Bias in treatment assignment in controlled clinical trials. N Engl J Med 1983; 309:1358–61.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  86. Chalmers TC, Levin H, Sacks HS, Reitman D, Bernier J, Nagalingam R. Meta-analysis of clinical trials as a scientific discipline. I. Control of bias and comparison with large co-operative trials. Stat Med 1987; 6:315–25.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  87. Peto R. Why do we need systematic overviews of randomized trials? Stat Med 1987; 6:233–40.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  88. Yusuf S. Obtaining medically meaningful answers from an overview of randomized clinical trials. Stat Med 1987; 6:281–86.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  89. Fleiss IL, Gross AJ. Meta-analysis in epidemiology, with special reference to studies of the association between exposure to environmental tobacco smoke and lung cancer: a critique. J Clin Epidemiol 1991; 44:127–39.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  90. Eysenck HJ. An exercise in megasilliness. Am Psycol 1978; 35:517.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  91. Wachter KW. Disturbed by meta-analysis? Science 1988; 241:1407–08.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  92. Kleinbaum DG, Kupper LL, Morgenstern H. Epidemiologic research. New York, NY: Van Nostrand Reinhold Co, 1982: 194–219.

    Google Scholar 

  93. Felson DT. Bias in meta-analytic research. J Clin Epidemiol 1992; 45:885–92.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  94. Hewitt P, Chalmers TC. Using MEDLINE to peruse the literature. Control Clin Trials 1985; 6:75–83.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  95. Hewitt P, Chalmers TC. Perusing the literature: methods of accessing MEDLINE and related data bases. Control Clin Trials 1985; 6:168–77.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  96. Poynard T, Conn HO. The retrieval or randomized clinical trials in liver disease from the medical literature: a comparison of MEDLARS and manual methods. Control Clin Trials 1985; 6:271–79.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  97. Dickersin K, Kewitt P, Mutch L, Chalmers I, Chalmers TC. Perusing the literature: comparison of MEDLINE searching with a perinatal database. Control Clin Trials 1985; 6:306–17.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  98. Haynes RB, McKibbon KA, Walker CJ, et al. Computer searching of the medical literature: an evaluation of MEDLINE search systems. Ann Intern Med 1985; 103:812–16.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  99. Begg CB, Berlin JA. Publication bias and dissemination of clinical research. J Natl Cancer Inst 1989; 81:107–14.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  100. Begg CB, Berlin JA. Publication bias: a problem in interpreting medical data. J Royal Stat Soc A 1988; 151:419–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  101. Dickersin K, Chan S, Chalmers TC, et al. Publication bias and clinical trials. Control Clin Trials 1987; 8:343–53.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  102. Simes RJ. Confronting publication bias: a cohort design for meta-analysis. Stat Med 1987; 6:11–29.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  103. Simes RJ. Publication bias: the case for an international registry of trials. J Clin Oncol 1986; 4:1529–41.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  104. Dickersin K, Min YI, Meinert CL. Factors influencing publication of research results: follow-up of applications submitted to two institutional review boards. JAMA 1992; 267:374–78.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  105. Easterbrook PI, Berlin JA, Copalan R, Matthews DR. Publication bias in clinical research. Lancet 1991; 337:867–72.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  106. Chalmers I, Adams M, Dickersin K, et al. A cohort study of summary reports of controlled trials. JAMA 1990; 263:1401–05.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  107. Grégoire G, Derderian F, LeLorier J. Selecting the language of publication included in a meta-analysis: Is there a Tower of Babel bias? J Clin Epidemiol 1995; 48:15963.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  108. Egger M, Zellweger-Zatner T, Schneider M, Junker C, Lengeler C, Antes G. Language bias in randomized controlled trials published in English and German. Lancet 1997; 350:326–29.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  109. Moher D, Fortin P, Jadad AR, et al. Completeness of reporting of trials published in languages other than English: Implications for conduct and reporting of systemic reviews. Lancet 1996; 347:363–66.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  110. Yusuf S, Peto R, Lewis J, Collins R, Sleight P. Beta blockade during and after myocardial infarction: an overview of the randomized trials. Prog Cardiovasc Dis 1985; 27:335–71.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  111. DerSimonian R, Laird N. Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials 1986; 7:177–88.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  112. Cochran WG. The combination of estimates from different experiments. Biometrics 1954; 10:101–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  113. Vamvakas EC. Meta-analysis in transfusion medicine. Transfusion 1997; 37:329–45.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

    Authors
    1. E. C. Vamvakas
      View author publications

      You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

    Editor information

    Editors and Affiliations

    1. Blood Bank Noord Nederland, Groningen, The Netherlands

      C. Th. Smit Sibinga

    2. Edinburgh, Scotland, UK

      J. D. Cash

    Rights and permissions

    Reprints and permissions

    Copyright information

    © 2001 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

    About this chapter

    Cite this chapter

    Vamvakas, E.C. (2001). Contributions of Meta-Analysis to Transfusion Medicine. In: Sibinga, C.T.S., Cash, J.D. (eds) Transfusion Medicine: Quo Vadis? What Has Been Achieved, What Is to Be Expected. Developments in Hematology and Immunology, vol 36. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-1735-1_18

    Download citation

    • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-1735-1_18

    • Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA

    • Print ISBN: 978-1-4613-5700-1

    • Online ISBN: 978-1-4615-1735-1

    • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

    Publish with us

    Policies and ethics

    Search

    Navigation