Asset Details
MbrlCatalogueTitleDetail
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Robust point and variance estimation for meta‐analyses with selective reporting and dependent effect sizes
by
Yang, Yefeng
, Williams, Coralie
, Lagisz, Malgorzata
, Nakagawa, Shinichi
, Noble, Daniel W. A.
, Pan, Jinming
in
Bias
/ Biological effects
/ effect size
/ Error reduction
/ evidence synthesis
/ meta research
/ Meta-analysis
/ mixed‐effects model
/ Parameter estimation
/ publication bias
/ Robustness
/ selective reporting
/ Sensitivity analysis
/ Statistical inference
/ Statistical methods
/ Statistics
/ Synthesis
/ Variance
2024
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
You are currently in the queue to collect this book. You will be notified once it is your turn to collect the book.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Robust point and variance estimation for meta‐analyses with selective reporting and dependent effect sizes
by
Yang, Yefeng
, Williams, Coralie
, Lagisz, Malgorzata
, Nakagawa, Shinichi
, Noble, Daniel W. A.
, Pan, Jinming
in
Bias
/ Biological effects
/ effect size
/ Error reduction
/ evidence synthesis
/ meta research
/ Meta-analysis
/ mixed‐effects model
/ Parameter estimation
/ publication bias
/ Robustness
/ selective reporting
/ Sensitivity analysis
/ Statistical inference
/ Statistical methods
/ Statistics
/ Synthesis
/ Variance
2024
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to remove the title from your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Do you wish to request the book?
Robust point and variance estimation for meta‐analyses with selective reporting and dependent effect sizes
by
Yang, Yefeng
, Williams, Coralie
, Lagisz, Malgorzata
, Nakagawa, Shinichi
, Noble, Daniel W. A.
, Pan, Jinming
in
Bias
/ Biological effects
/ effect size
/ Error reduction
/ evidence synthesis
/ meta research
/ Meta-analysis
/ mixed‐effects model
/ Parameter estimation
/ publication bias
/ Robustness
/ selective reporting
/ Sensitivity analysis
/ Statistical inference
/ Statistical methods
/ Statistics
/ Synthesis
/ Variance
2024
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Robust point and variance estimation for meta‐analyses with selective reporting and dependent effect sizes
Journal Article
Robust point and variance estimation for meta‐analyses with selective reporting and dependent effect sizes
2024
Request Book From Autostore
and Choose the Collection Method
Overview
Meta‐analysis produces a quantitative synthesis of evidence‐based knowledge, shaping not only research trends but also policies and practices in biology. However, two statistical issues, selective reporting and statistical dependence, can severely distort meta‐analytic parameter estimation and inference. Here, we re‐analyse 448 meta‐analyses to demonstrate a new two‐step procedure to deal with two common challenges in biological meta‐analyses that often occur simultaneously: publication bias and non‐independence. First, we employ bias‐robust weighting schemes under the generalized least square estimator to obtain average effect sizes that are more robust to selective reporting. We then use cluster‐robust variance estimation to account for statistical dependence, reducing bias in estimating standard errors and ensuring valid statistical inference. The first step of our approach demonstrates comparable performance in estimating average effect sizes to the existing publication‐bias adjustment methods in the presence of selective reporting. This equivalence holds across two publication bias selection processes. The second step achieves estimates of standard errors consistent with the multilevel meta‐analytic model, a benchmark method with adequate control of Type I error rates for multiple, statistically dependent effect sizes. Re‐analyses of 448 meta‐analyses show that ignoring these two issues tends to overestimate effect sizes by an average of 110% and underestimate standard errors by 120%. To facilitate implementation, we have developed a website including a step‐by‐step tutorial. Complementing current meta‐analytic workflows with the proposed method as a sensitivity analysis can facilitate a transition to a more robust approach in quantitative evidence synthesis.
Publisher
John Wiley & Sons, Inc,Wiley
Subject
/ Variance
This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website.