A Bayesian nonparametric meta-analysis model for estimating the reference interval

A reference interval represents the normative range for measurements from a healthy population. It plays an important role in laboratory testing, as well as in differentiating healthy from diseased patients. The reference interval based on a single study might not be applicable to a broader population. Meta-analysis can provide a more generalizable reference interval based on the combined population by synthesizing results from multiple studies. However, the assumptions of normally distributed underlying study-specific means and equal within-study variances, which are commonly used in existing methods, are strong and may not hold in practice. We propose a Bayesian nonparametric model with more flexible assumptions to extend random effects meta-analysis for estimating reference intervals. We illustrate through simulation studies and two real data examples the performance of our proposed approach when the assumptions of normally distributed study means and equal within-study variances do not hold.

Interocular asymmetry of choroidal thickness and vascularity index measurements in normal eyes assessed by swept-source optical coherence tomography

BACKGROUND

To investigate the symmetry of interocular choroidal thickness and vascularity index measurements in normal eyes using swept-source optical coherence tomography (SS-OCT). Cross-sectional and observational study. This study included 244 eyes of 122 normal adults with ages uniformly distributed from 19 to 89 years.

METHODS

SS-OCT imaging was performed using a scanning pattern of 12×12 mm. Mean choroidal thickness (MCT) and choroidal vascularity index (CVI) measurements in the entire scanning region were obtained using a validated and published automatic method. The correlation and differences (including signed and absolute differences) between bilateral MCT and CVI measurements were analyzed at the following 6 regions: 3 concentric circles centered on the fovea with diameters of 2.5, 5, and 11 mm; the inner rim from 2.5 to 5 mm circle; the outer rim from 5 to 11 mm circle; and the entire 12×12-mm scan region, respectively. Comparison of interocular MCT and CVI measurements.

RESULTS

MCT measurements in right and left eyes were strongly correlated in all regions [all intraclass correlation (ICC) >0.73], but MCT measurements in right eyes were significantly thicker than in left eyes. CVI measurements in right and left eyes were moderately correlated in all regions (all ICC >0.46), but CVI measurements in right eyes were significantly smaller than that in left eyes in the macular subregions (2.5 mm circle, 5 mm circle, and the inner rim). Neither signed nor absolute interocular differences in MCT were correlated with corresponding CVI interocular differences.

CONCLUSIONS

Choroidal differences exist between normal fellow eyes in adults in the absence of obvious pathology. This study is useful in assisting clinicians and researchers in distinguishing asymmetric changes that are to be expected in normal eyes versus changes that could be associated with diseases.

Reference ranges of handgrip strength from 125,462 healthy adults in 21 countries: a prospective urban rural epidemiologic (PURE) study

BACKGROUND

The measurement of handgrip strength (HGS) has prognostic value with respect to all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality and cardiovascular disease, and is an important part of the evaluation of frailty. Published reference ranges for HGS are mostly derived from Caucasian populations in high-income countries. There is a paucity of information on normative HGS values in non-Caucasian populations from low- or middle-income countries. The objective of this study was to develop reference HGS ranges for healthy adults from a broad range of ethnicities and socioeconomically diverse geographic regions.

METHODS

HGS was measured using a Jamar dynamometer in 125,462 healthy adults aged 35-70 years from 21 countries in the Prospective Urban Rural Epidemiology (PURE) study.

RESULTS

HGS values differed among individuals from different geographic regions. HGS values were highest among those from Europe/North America, lowest among those from South Asia, South East Asia and Africa, and intermediate among those from China, South America, and the Middle East. Reference ranges stratified by geographic region, age, and sex are presented. These ranges varied from a median (25^th-75^th percentile) 50 kg (43-56 kg) in men <40 years from Europe/North America to 18 kg (14-20 kg) in women >60 years from South East Asia. Reference ranges by ethnicity and body-mass index are also reported.

CONCLUSIONS

Individual HGS measurements should be interpreted using region/ethnic-specific reference ranges.