A comparison of three different models for estimating relative risk in meta-analysis of clinical trials under unobserved heterogeneity

We focus on the comparison of three statistical models used to estimate the treatment effect in metaanalysis when individually pooled data are available. The models are two conventional models, namely a multi-level and a model based upon an approximate likelihood, and a newly developed model, the profile likelihood model which might be viewed as an extension of the Mantel-Haenszel approach. To exemplify these methods, we use results from a meta-analysis of 22 trials to prevent respiratory tract infections. We show that by using the multi-level approach, in the case of baseline heterogeneity, the number of clusters or components is considerably over-estimated. The approximate and profile likelihood method showed nearly the same pattern for the treatment effect distribution. To provide more evidence two simulation studies are accomplished. The profile likelihood can be considered as a clear alternative to the approximate likelihood model. In the case of strong baseline heterogeneity, the profile likelihood method shows superior behaviour when compared with the multi-level model. Copyright (C) 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Meta-analysis of relationships between enteric methane yield and milk fatty acid profile in dairy cattle

Various studies have indicated a relationship between enteric methane (CH4) production and milk fatty acid (FA) profiles of dairy cattle. However, the number of studies investigating such a relationship is limited and the direct relationships reported are mainly obtained by variation in CH4 production and milk FA concentration induced by dietary lipid supplements. The aim of this study was to perform a meta-analysis to quantify relationships between CH4 yield (per unit of feed and unit of milk) and milk FA profile in dairy cattle and to develop equations to predict CH4 yield based on milk FA profile of cows fed a wide variety of diets. Data from 8 experiments encompassing 30 different dietary treatments and 146 observations were included. Yield of CH4 measured in these experiments was 21.5 ± 2.46 g/kg of dry matter intake (DMI) and 13.9 ± 2.30 g/ kg of fat- and protein-corrected milk (FPCM). Correlation coefficients were chosen as effect size of the relationship between CH4 yield and individual milk FA concentration (g/100 g of FA). Average true correlation coefficients were estimated by a random-effects model. Milk FA concentrations of C6:0, C8:0, C10:0, C16:0, and C16:0-iso were significantly or tended to be positively related to CH4 yield per unit of feed. Concentrations of trans-6+7+8+9 C18:1, trans-10+11 C18:1, cis- 11 C18:1, cis-12 C18:1, cis-13 C18:1, trans-16+cis-14 C18:1, and cis-9,12 C18:2 in milk fat were significantly or tended to be negatively related to CH4 yield per unit of feed. Milk FA concentrations of C10:0, C12:0, C14:0-iso, C14:0, cis-9 C14:1, C15:0, and C16:0 were significantly or tended to be positively related to CH4 yield per unit of milk. Concentrations of C4:0, C18:0, trans-10+11 C18:1, cis-9 C18:1, cis-11 C18:1, and cis- 9,12 C18:2 in milk fat were significantly or tended to be negatively related to CH4 yield per unit of milk. Mixed model multiple regression and a stepwise selection procedure of milk FA based on the Bayesian information criterion to predict CH4 yield with milk FA as input (g/100 g of FA) resulted in the following prediction equations: CH4 (g/kg of DMI) = 23.39 + 9.74 × C16:0- iso – 1.06 × trans-10+11 C18:1 – 1.75 × cis-9,12 C18:2 (R2 = 0.54), and CH4 (g/kg of FPCM) = 21.13 – 1.38 × C4:0 + 8.53 × C16:0-iso – 0.22 × cis-9 C18:1 – 0.59 × trans-10+11 C18:1 (R2 = 0.47). This indicated that milk FA profile has a moderate potential for predicting CH4 yield per unit of feed and a slightly lower potential for predicting CH4 yield per unit of milk. Key words: methane , milk fatty acid profile , metaanalysis , dairy cattle