To cite this paper use one of the standards below:
Many systematic reviews of randomized clinical trials require meta-analyses of odds ratios. A conventional method estimate the overall odds ratios via weighted averages of the logarithm of individual odds ratios. However, this approach has several deficiencies due to the underlying assumptions and approximations. The goal of this study is to understand and quantify the methodological pitfalls in conducting a meta-analysis of odds ratios. The fixed-effect and random-effect models of pooled odds ratios are compared by applying to a meta-analysis of SNP studies. A popular statistical software R is used for the analysis. The point estimates and confidence intervals for the overall log odds ratio can differ substantially between the traditional and alternative methods, which would affect the resulting statistical inferences. For producing reliable results, the traditional methods for meta-analysis of odds ratios should be discouraged.
With nearly 200,000 papers published, Galoá empowers scholars to share and discover cutting-edge research through our streamlined and accessible academic publishing platform.
Learn more about our products:
This proceedings is identified by a DOI , for use in citations or bibliographic references. Attention: this is not a DOI for the paper and as such cannot be used in Lattes to identify a particular work.
Check the link "How to cite" in the paper's page, to see how to properly cite the paper