Literature DB >> 33742752

Improving the reporting quality of reliability generalization meta-analyses: The REGEMA checklist.

Julio Sánchez-Meca1, Fulgencio Marín-Martínez1, José Antonio López-López1, Rosa Maria Núñez-Núñez2, María Rubio-Aparicio3, Juan José López-García1, José Antonio López-Pina1, Desirée Mª Blázquez-Rincón1, Carmen López-Ibáñez1, Rubén López-Nicolás1.   

Abstract

Reliability generalization (RG) is a meta-analytic approach that aims to characterize how reliability estimates from the same test vary across different applications of the instrument. With this purpose RG meta-analyses typically focus on a particular test and intend to obtain an overall reliability of test scores and to investigate how the composition and variability of the samples affect reliability. Although several guidelines have been proposed in the meta-analytic literature to help authors improve the reporting quality of meta-analyses, none of them were devised for RG meta-analyses. The purpose of this investigation was to develop REGEMA (REliability GEneralization Meta-Analysis), a 30-item checklist (plus a flow chart) adapted to the specific issues that the reporting of an RG meta-analysis must take into account. Based on previous checklists and guidelines proposed in the meta-analytic arena, a first version was elaborated by applying the nominal group methodology. The resulting instrument was submitted to a list of independent meta-analysis experts and, after discussion, the final version of the REGEMA checklist was reached. In a pilot study, four pairs of coders applied REGEMA to a random sample of 40 RG meta-analyses in Psychology, and results showed satisfactory inter-coder reliability. REGEMA can be used by: (a) meta-analysts conducting or reporting an RG meta-analysis and aiming to improve its reporting quality; (b) consumers of RG meta-analyses who want to make informed critical appraisals of their reporting quality, and (c) reviewers and editors of journals who are considering submissions where an RG meta-analysis was reported for potential publication.
© 2021 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Keywords:  meta-analysis; reliability coefficient; reliability generalization; reporting quality; systematic reviews

Year:  2021        PMID: 33742752     DOI: 10.1002/jrsm.1487

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Res Synth Methods        ISSN: 1759-2879            Impact factor:   5.273


  3 in total

Review 1.  How (Not) to Measure Loneliness: A Review of the Eight Most Commonly Used Scales.

Authors:  Marlies Maes; Pamela Qualter; Gerine M A Lodder; Marcus Mund
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2022-08-30       Impact factor: 4.614

Review 2.  Basic Empathy Scale: A Systematic Review and Reliability Generalization Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Javier Cabedo-Peris; Manuel Martí-Vilar; César Merino-Soto; Mafalda Ortiz-Morán
Journal:  Healthcare (Basel)       Date:  2021-12-24

Review 3.  A meta-review of transparency and reproducibility-related reporting practices in published meta-analyses on clinical psychological interventions (2000-2020).

Authors:  Rubén López-Nicolás; José Antonio López-López; María Rubio-Aparicio; Julio Sánchez-Meca
Journal:  Behav Res Methods       Date:  2021-06-26
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.