Literature DB >> 18331152

Confidence intervals for the overall effect size in random-effects meta-analysis.

Julio Sánchez-Meca1, Fulgencio Marín-Martínez.   

Abstract

One of the main objectives in meta-analysis is to estimate the overall effect size by calculating a confidence interval (CI). The usual procedure consists of assuming a standard normal distribution and a sampling variance defined as the inverse of the sum of the estimated weights of the effect sizes. But this procedure does not take into account the uncertainty due to the fact that the heterogeneity variance (tau2) and the within-study variances have to be estimated, leading to CIs that are too narrow with the consequence that the actual coverage probability is smaller than the nominal confidence level. In this article, the performances of 3 alternatives to the standard CI procedure are examined under a random-effects model and 8 different tau2 estimators to estimate the weights: the t distribution CI, the weighted variance CI (with an improved variance), and the quantile approximation method (recently proposed). The results of a Monte Carlo simulation showed that the weighted variance CI outperformed the other methods regardless of the tau2 estimator, the value of tau2, the number of studies, and the sample size.

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18331152     DOI: 10.1037/1082-989X.13.1.31

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Psychol Methods        ISSN: 1082-989X


  34 in total

1.  Discovery properties of genome-wide association signals from cumulatively combined data sets.

Authors:  Tiago V Pereira; Nikolaos A Patsopoulos; Georgia Salanti; John P A Ioannidis
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2009-10-06       Impact factor: 4.897

2.  Looking at DIF From a New Perspective: A Structure-Based Approach Acknowledging Inherent Indefinability.

Authors:  Anna Doebler
Journal:  Appl Psychol Meas       Date:  2018-09-11

Review 3.  A meta-analysis of the survival-processing advantage in memory.

Authors:  John E Scofield; Erin M Buchanan; Bogdan Kostic
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2018-06

4.  A methodological review of meta-analyses of the effectiveness of clinical psychology treatments.

Authors:  María Rubio-Aparicio; Fulgencio Marín-Martínez; Julio Sánchez-Meca; José Antonio López-López
Journal:  Behav Res Methods       Date:  2018-10

Review 5.  Association of Spinal Manipulative Therapy With Clinical Benefit and Harm for Acute Low Back Pain: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Authors:  Neil M Paige; Isomi M Miake-Lye; Marika Suttorp Booth; Jessica M Beroes; Aram S Mardian; Paul Dougherty; Richard Branson; Baron Tang; Sally C Morton; Paul G Shekelle
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2017-04-11       Impact factor: 56.272

6.  A Meta-analysis of Gut Microbiota in Children with Autism.

Authors:  Pedro Andreo-Martínez; María Rubio-Aparicio; Julio Sánchez-Meca; Alejandro Veas; Agustín Ernesto Martínez-González
Journal:  J Autism Dev Disord       Date:  2021-05-05

7.  Heterogeneity estimates in a biased world.

Authors:  Johannes Hönekopp; Audrey Helen Linden
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-02-03       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Evaluation of inconsistency in networks of interventions.

Authors:  Areti Angeliki Veroniki; Haris S Vasiliadis; Julian P T Higgins; Georgia Salanti
Journal:  Int J Epidemiol       Date:  2013-02       Impact factor: 7.196

9.  II. Indices of Pain Intensity Derived From Ecological Momentary Assessments and Their Relationships With Patient Functioning: An Individual Patient Data Meta-analysis.

Authors:  Stefan Schneider; Doerte U Junghaenel; Joan E Broderick; Masakatsu Ono; Marcella May; Arthur A Stone
Journal:  J Pain       Date:  2020-10-24       Impact factor: 5.820

Review 10.  Preventive physiotherapy interventions for back care in children and adolescents: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Inmaculada Calvo-Muñoz; Antonia Gómez-Conesa; Julio Sánchez-Meca
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2012-08-21       Impact factor: 2.362

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.