A paradox in random-effects meta-analysis

12/21/2018
by   Jiandong Shi, et al.
0

This paper reports a new paradox in random-effects meta-analysis. To our knowledge, this paradox has never been reported in the literature on meta-analysis. With the newly discovered paradox, it has been putting us in a dilemma on what final conclusion can be made. We hence advocate meta-analysts to be extremely careful when interpreting the final results from the random-effects meta-analysis, in particular when the number of studies is small and the heterogeneity is large.

READ FULL TEXT
POST COMMENT

Comments

There are no comments yet.

Authors

page 1

page 2

page 3

page 4

02/11/2020

Fixed-effects model: the most convincing model for meta-analysis with few studies

According to Davey et al. (2011) with a total of 22,453 meta-analyses fr...
06/13/2012

Online open neuroimaging mass meta-analysis

We describe a system for meta-analysis where a wiki stores numerical dat...
01/26/2018

Median bias reduction in random-effects meta-analysis and meta-regression

Random-effects models are frequently used to synthesise information from...
09/24/2019

Trimmed Constrained Mixed Effects Models: Formulations and Algorithms

Mixed effects (ME) models inform a vast array of problems in the physica...
05/15/2021

Content Analysis Application in Nursing: A Synthetic Knowledge Synthesis Meta-Study

Theoretical issues: With the explosive growth in the research literature...
06/02/2020

Evaluating Public Supports to the Investment Activities of Business Firms: A Multilevel Meta-Regression Analysis of Italian Studies

We conduct an extensive meta-regression analysis of counterfactual progr...
This week in AI

Get the week's most popular data science and artificial intelligence research sent straight to your inbox every Saturday.