[R-meta] Peto random effect?

[Philippe Tadger]

Thanks Guido for the detailed explanation! It's Cristal clear.

On 06/10/2021 13:19, Guido Schwarzer wrote:
> Am 06.10.21 um 12:39 schrieb Philippe Tadger:
>
>> Dear r-sig-meta community,
>>
>> In Revman, doesn't seems to be options to do a Peto with random effect,
>> But I see that is available in meta and metafor.
>> [...]
>> Am I missing something here? Does any one know the reason why is not
>> available in Revman?
>
> I cannot answer the question concerning RevMan.
>
> The Peto odds ratio (POR) for an individual study is constructed under 
> the null hypothesis of no treatment difference, i.e., a true odds 
> ratio of 1. This implies that the POR is a biased estimate of the OR 
> for large treatment effects, i.e., if the true odds ratio is far away 
> from 1 (Brockhaus et al., 2014).
>
> One may argue that the Peto method, i.e., a meta-analysis using the 
> POR as effect measure, is inherently a fixed effect / common effect 
> method due to its construction under the null hypothesis of no 
> treatment difference. However, in my view, the POR is an effect 
> measure and I do not see why it should not be used in a random effects 
> meta-analysis.
>
> Best, Guido
>
> 1.
> Brockhaus AC, Bender R, Skipka G. The Peto odds ratio viewed as a new 
> effect measure. Statistics in Medicine. 2014;33(28):4861–74.
-- 
Kind regards/Saludos cordiales
*Philippe Tadger*
ORCID <https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1453-4105>, Reseach Gate 
<https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Philippe-Tadger>
Phone/WhatsApp: +32498774742

	[[alternative HTML version deleted]]