본문으로 건너뛰기
← 뒤로

Meta-Analysis of Median Survival Times With Inverse-Variance Weighting.

메타분석 1/5 보강
Statistics in medicine 📖 저널 OA 56.5% 2026 Vol.45(8-9) p. e70533
Retraction 확인
출처

McGrath S, Yang CH, Kimmelman J, Ozturk O, Steele R, Benedetti A

ℹ️ 이 논문은 무료 전문이 아직 없습니다. 코퍼스 전체의 43.6%는 무료 가능 (통계 →) · 🏥 기관 EZproxy로 시도

📝 환자 설명용 한 줄

We consider the problem of meta-analyzing outcome measures based on median survival times.

🔬 핵심 임상 통계 (초록에서 자동 추출 — 원문 검증 권장)
  • 연구 설계 meta-analysis

이 논문을 인용하기

↓ .bib ↓ .ris
APA McGrath S, Yang CH, et al. (2026). Meta-Analysis of Median Survival Times With Inverse-Variance Weighting.. Statistics in medicine, 45(8-9), e70533. https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.70533
MLA McGrath S, et al.. "Meta-Analysis of Median Survival Times With Inverse-Variance Weighting.." Statistics in medicine, vol. 45, no. 8-9, 2026, pp. e70533.
PMID 41998861 ↗
DOI 10.1002/sim.70533

Abstract

We consider the problem of meta-analyzing outcome measures based on median survival times. Primary studies with time-to-event outcomes often report estimates of median survival times and confidence intervals based on the Kaplan-Meier estimator. However, outcome measures based on median survival are rarely meta-analyzed, as standard inverse-variance weighted methods require within-study standard errors that are typically not reported. In this article, we consider an inverse-variance weighted approach to meta-analyze median survival times that estimates the within-study standard errors from the reported confidence intervals. We show that this method consistently estimates the standard error of median survival when applied to confidence intervals constructed by the Brookmeyer-Crowley method. We conduct a series of simulation studies evaluating the performance of this approach at the study level (i.e., for estimating the standard error of median survival) and the meta-analytic level (i.e., for estimating the pooled median, difference of medians, and ratio of medians) for commonly used confidence intervals for median survival, including the Brookmeyer-Crowley method and nonparametric bootstrap. We find that this approach often performs comparably to a benchmark approach that uses the true within-study standard errors for meta-analyzing median-based outcome measures when within-study sample sizes are moderately large (e.g., above 50). However, when the effective sample sizes are small, the method can yield biased estimates of within-study standard errors. We illustrate an application of this approach in a meta-analysis evaluating survival benefits of being assigned to experimental arms versus comparator arms in randomized trials for non-small cell lung cancer therapies.

🏷️ 키워드 / MeSH 📖 같은 키워드 OA만