Searcharxiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2310.13178

Exact Inference for Common Odds Ratio in Meta-Analysis with Zero-Total-Event Studies

Xiaolin Chen·Jerry Q Cheng·Lu Tian·Minge Xie
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Stemming from the high profile publication of Nissen and Wolski (2007) and subsequent discussions with divergent views on how to handle observed zero-total-event studies, defined to be studies which observe zero events in both treatment and control arms, the research topic concerning the common odds ratio model with zero-total-event studies remains to be an unresolved problem in meta-analysis. In this article, we address this problem by proposing a novel repro samples method to handle zero-total-event studies and make inference for the parameter of common odds ratio. The development explicitly accounts for sampling scheme and does not rely on large sample approximation. It is theoretically justified with a guaranteed finite sample performance. The empirical performance of the proposed method is demonstrated through simulation studies. It shows that the proposed confidence set achieves the desired empirical coverage rate and also that the zero-total-event studies contains information and impacts the inference for the common odds ratio. The proposed method is applied to combine information in the Nissen and Wolski study.

Explore related subjects

stat.ME

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Xiaolin Chen, Jerry Q Cheng, Lu Tian, Minge Xie. 2023-10-19. Exact Inference for Common Odds Ratio in Meta-Analysis with Zero-Total-Event Studies. https://arxiv.org/abs/2310.13178

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Surprise Reduction and Nullification in Bayesian and Inverse Bayesian Inference under Ambiguous Prediction-Error Attribution

In non-stationary environments, prediction errors may signal environmental change or transient outliers, and adaptive systems must track such changes without overreacting to outliers. We distinguish surprise reduction, which updates beliefs to fit observations, from surprise nullification, which weakens constraints imposed by the predictive structure, and formalize both within Bayesian and inverse Bayesian (BIB) inference. Belief and likelihood updates are derived from variational objectives sharing a nullification strength, determined endogenously by minimizing surprise under the candidate post-update predictive distribution. In the Gaussian case, nullification expands belief and likelihood variances by a common factor relative to standard Bayesian updating, leaving the ratio unchanged. BIB thus defers attribution of the prediction error, committing to neither latent-state change nor observation-process uncertainty. The nullification strength is carried over as a candidate and is maintained or released according to the predictive surprise of the next observation. In a mean estimation task with outliers and changepoints, no scanned parameter setting of a Sage-Husa-type adaptive Kalman filter, fixed-strength BIB variant, or belief-forgetting-only variant outperforms BIB in both changepoint tracking and post-outlier stability. An oracle-informed reduced Bayesian model tracks changepoints better but is less stable after outliers. Although BIB maintains no explicit hypotheses about changepoints or outliers, it generates event-dependent dynamics. The learning rate increases after changepoints, whereas after outliers, nullification is released, and this increase is suppressed. Deferring attribution and letting subsequent observations differentiate the responses may constitute a principle of adaptive inference in non-stationary environments.

stat.ME↗
arXiv2026

Generalized Ridge Refitting for the Lasso and Prediction Improvement Bounds

We study a class of Lasso based estimators obtained by applying a quadratic correction on the Lasso equicorrelation set. The penalty matrix determines both the magnitude and geometry of the correction and contains, among other cases, the isotropic Lasso--Ridge correction, least squares refitting, Gram proportional interpolation between the Lasso and least squares, and coordinate specific penalties. We first derive a closed form representation and isolate the positive gain component of the resulting prediction improvement. We then control the remaining stochastic linear term in expectation by localizing the random signed equicorrelation model around a deterministic reference support. This yields a finite sample expectation bound that explicitly accounts for the randomness induced by Lasso model selection. The resulting decomposition provides a unified framework for understanding when Lasso based quadratic corrections can improve prediction.

stat.ME↗
arXiv2026

Discretization in covariate-adaptive randomization: gains and losses

Covariate-adaptive randomization(CAR) is widely implemented in clinical trials to balance prognostic covariates across treatment arms. Continuous covariates are often discretized into strata in practice, yet their consequences are not clearly understood. This paper provides a comprehensive study of the impact of discretization on both the CAR design process and the inferential results thereafter. We establish the asymptotic properties of both imbalance measures and treatment effect estimators under discretized and non-discretized settings. Practical recommendations are given on when and how discretization should be employed. We show that discretization in design is generally recommended, as it enhances robustness against model misspecification. However, if the true model is known, the most efficient strategy is to balance covariates according to that model in the design. The theoretical results are corroborated by extensive simulation studies and an empirical application to a diabetes trial dataset. Together, the results clarify the gains and losses of discretization in CAR and pave the way for learning impact of discretization to other designs and beyond.

stat.ME↗