Analysis of multicentre epidemiological studies: contrasting fixed or random effects modelling and meta-analysis
- 1 August 2018
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Oxford University Press (OUP) in International Journal of Epidemiology
- Vol. 47 (4), 1343-1354
- https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/dyy117
Abstract
Multicentre studies are common in epidemiological research aiming at identifying disease risk factors. A major advantage of multicentre over single-centre studies is that, by including a larger number of participants, they allow consideration of rare outcomes and exposures. Their multicentric nature introduces some complexities at the step of data analysis, in particular when it comes to controlling for confounding by centre, which is the focus of this tutorial. Commonly, epidemiologists use one of the following options: pooling all centre-specific data and adjusting for centre using fixed effects; adjusting for centre using random effects; or fitting centre-specific models and combining the results in a meta-analysis. Here, we illustrate the similarities of and differences between these three modelling approaches, explain the reasons why they may provide different conclusions and offer advice on which model to choose depending on the characteristics of the study. Two key issues to examine during the analyses are to distinguish within-centre from between-centre associations, and the possible heterogeneity of the effects (of exposure and/or confounders) by centre. A real epidemiological study is used to illustrate a situation in which these various options yield different results. A synthetic dataset and R and Stata codes are provided to reproduce the results.Keywords
Funding Information
- European Union Seventh Framework Program (grant 211250)
- Danish Council for Independent Research (DFF-4004-00179)
This publication has 25 references indexed in Scilit:
- Birth Weight and Prenatal Exposure to Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) and Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene (DDE): A Meta-analysis within 12 European Birth CohortsEnvironmental Health Perspectives, 2012
- A basic introduction to fixed-effect and random-effects models for meta-analysisResearch Synthesis Methods, 2010
- Fixed effects, random effects and GEE: What are the differences?Statistics in Medicine, 2008
- Occupational Exposure to Crystalline Silica and Risk of Lung CancerEpidemiology, 2007
- Separation of individual‐level and cluster‐level covariate effects in regression analysis of correlated dataStatistics in Medicine, 2003
- Insights on bias and information in group-level studiesBiostatistics, 2003
- Relation of bronchial responsiveness to body mass index in the ECRHSThorax, 2002
- European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC): study populations and data collectionPublic Health Nutrition, 2002
- A Comparison of Models for Clustered Binary Outcomes: Analysis of a Designed Immunology ExperimentJournal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C: Applied Statistics, 2001
- Multilevel Analysis in Public Health ResearchAnnual Review of Public Health, 2000