Incorporating uncertainty regarding applicability of evidence from meta-analyses into clinical decision making

OBJECTIVES: Judging applicability (relevance) of meta-analytical findings to particular clinical decision-making situations remains challenging. We aimed to describe an evidence synthesis method that accounts for possible uncertainty regarding applicability of the evidence.
STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We conceptualized uncertainty regarding applicability of the meta-analytical estimates to a decision-making situation as the result of uncertainty regarding applicability of the findings of the trials that were included in the meta-analysis. This trial-level applicability uncertainty can be directly assessed by the decision maker and allows for the definition of trial inclusion probabilities, which can be used to perform a probabilistic meta-analysis with unequal probability resampling of trials (adaptive meta-analysis). A case study with several fictitious decision-making scenarios was performed to demonstrate the method in practice.
RESULTS: We present options to elicit trial inclusion probabilities and perform the calculations. The result of an adaptive meta-analysis is a frequency distribution of the estimated parameters from traditional meta-analysis that provides individually tailored information according to the specific needs and uncertainty of the decision maker.
CONCLUSION: The proposed method offers a direct and formalized combination of research evidence with individual clinical expertise and may aid clinicians in specific decision-making situations.