\title{studies on the effect of rosiglitazone on the risk of myocardial infarction and death from cardiovascular causes}
\description{results from 42 trials examining the effect of rosiglitazone on the risk of myocardial infarction and death from cardiovascular causes.}
\bold{study}             \tab \code{character} \tab study identifier \cr
\bold{type}              \tab \code{factor}    \tab type of trial (as in table 1) \cr
\bold{phase}             \tab \code{factor}    \tab study phase \cr
\bold{population}        \tab \code{character} \tab description of the study population \cr
\bold{start}, \bold{end} \tab \code{character} \tab study period (year-month) \cr
\bold{treatment}         \tab \code{character} \tab treatment group medication \cr
\bold{control}           \tab \code{character} \tab control group medication \cr
\bold{weeks}             \tab \code{numeric}   \tab follow-up duration (weeks) \cr
\bold{treat.total}       \tab \code{numeric}   \tab total number of patients in the treatment group \cr
\bold{treat.infarction}  \tab \code{numeric}   \tab number of patients with myocardial infarction in the treatment group \cr
\bold{treat.death}       \tab \code{numeric}   \tab number of deaths in the treatment group \cr
\bold{cont.total}        \tab \code{numeric}   \tab total number of patients in the control group \cr
\bold{cont.infarction}   \tab \code{numeric}   \tab number of patients with myocardial infarction in the control group \cr
\bold{cont.death}        \tab \code{numeric}   \tab number of deaths in the control group
nissen and wolski (2007) performed a systematic literature review aiming for randomized controlled trials (rcts) investigating the effects of rosiglitazone (avandia) in comparison to a control treatment, and with a follow-up duration of at least 24 weeks. 42 studies were included. a meta-analysis was performed to quantify the treatment effect on the risks of myocardial infarction and cardiovascular death in terms of the associated odds ratio (or).
the data set features a number of \dquote{zero} trials (no event observed in one of the treatment groups) as well as \dquote{double-zero} trials (no event in either treatment group), which poses a challenge for some analysis methods. the original analysis was a common-effect analysis based on the \emph{peto method} (see the \code{\link[metafor]{rma.peto}} help and the example code below). the data set as well as its original analysis have subsequently been discussed by other investigators (e.g., diamond et al., 2007; ruecker & schumacher, 2008; friedrich et al., 2009; tian et al., 2009; nissen & wolski, 2010). jackson et al. (2018) later surveyed a range of (random-effects) models that may be applicable in this context; see also the examples below.
see also \code{\link{dat.tian2009}} for the same dataset, but with 6 additional trials where no event was observed in either group for both outcomes.
nissen, s. e., & wolski, k. (2007). effect of rosiglitazone on the risk of myocardial infarction and death from cardiovascular causes. \emph{new england journal of medicine}, \bold{356}(24), 2457-2471. \verb{https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmoa072761}
diamond, g. a., bax, l., & kaul, s. (2007). uncertain effects of rosiglitazone on the risk for myocardial infarction and cardiovascular death. \emph{annals of internal medicine}, \bold{147}(8), 578--581. \verb{https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-147-8-200710160-00182}
friedrich, j. o., beyene, j., & adhikari, n. k. j. (2009). rosiglitazone: can meta-analysis accurately estimate excess cardiovascular risk given the available data? re-analysis of randomized trials using various methodologic approaches. \emph{bmc research notes}, \bold{2}, 5. \verb{https://doi.org/10.1186/1756-0500-2-5}
jackson, d., law, m., stijnen, t., viechtbauer, w., & white, i. r. (2018). a comparison of seven random-effects models for meta-analyses that estimate the summary odds ratio. \emph{statistics in medicine}, \bold{37}(7), 1059--1085. \verb{https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.7588}
nissen, s. e., & wolski, k. (2010). rosiglitazone revisited: an updated meta-analysis of risk for myocardial infarction and cardiovascular mortality. \emph{archives of internal medicine}, \bold{170}(14), 1191--1201. \verb{https://doi.org/10.1001/archinternmed.2010.207}
rücker, g., & schumacher, m. (2008). simpson’s paradox visualized: the example of the rosiglitazone meta-analysis. \emph{bmc medical research methodology}, \bold{8}, 34. \verb{https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-8-34}
tian, l., cai, t., pfeffer, m. a., piankov, n., cremieux, p.-y., & wei, l. j. (2009). exact and efficient inference procedure for meta-analysis and its application to the analysis of independent 2 x 2 tables with all available data but without artificial continuity correction. \emph{biostatistics}, \bold{10}(2), 275--281. \verb{https://doi.org/10.1093/biostatistics/kxn034}
ma07 <- rma.glmm(measure="or", model="um.rs", nagq=1,
ma08 <- rma.glmm(measure="or", model="um.rs", nagq=1,
# estimate ors based on hypergeometric model
# (model 7 (approx.) in jackson et al., 2018)
logor.inf <- rbind("peto"    =c("or"=ma01$b, "lower"=ma01$ci.lb, "upper"=ma01$ci.ub),
logor.mort <- rbind("peto"    =c("or"=ma02$b, "lower"=ma02$ci.lb, "upper"=ma02$ci.ub),
medicine, cardiology, odds ratios, peto's method, generalized linear models