nach oben

Neuropsychology Review

Erschienen in:

21.05.2016 | Review

A Guide to Conducting a Meta-Analysis

verfasst von: Mike W.-L. Cheung, Ranjith Vijayakumar

Erschienen in: Neuropsychology Review | Ausgabe 2/2016

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Meta-analysis is widely accepted as the preferred method to synthesize research findings in various disciplines. This paper provides an introduction to when and how to conduct a meta-analysis. Several practical questions, such as advantages of meta-analysis over conventional narrative review and the number of studies required for a meta-analysis, are addressed. Common meta-analytic models are then introduced. An artificial dataset is used to illustrate how a meta-analysis is conducted in several software packages. The paper concludes with some common pitfalls of meta-analysis and their solutions. The primary goal of this paper is to provide a summary background to readers who would like to conduct their first meta-analytic study.

Aytug, Z. G., Rothstein, H. R., Zhou, W., & Kern, M. C. (2012). Revealed or concealed? Transparency of procedures, decisions, and judgment calls in meta-analyses. Organizational Research Methods, 15(1), 103–133. doi:10.1177/1094428111403495.CrossRef

Bax, L., Yu, L.-M., Ikeda, N., & Moons, K. G. (2007). A systematic comparison of software dedicated to meta-analysis of causal studies. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 7(1), 40. doi:10.1186/1471-2288-7-40.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Borenstein, M. (2009). Effect sizes for continuous data. In H. Cooper, L. V. Hedges, & J. C. Valentine (Eds.), The handbook of research synthesis and meta-analysis (2nd ed., pp. 221–235). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., & Rothstein, H. R. (2005). Comprehensive meta-analysis (version 2). Englewood NJ: Biostat.

Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P. T., & Rothstein, H. R. (2009). Introduction to meta-analysis. Chichester, West Sussex, U.K.; Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons.CrossRef

Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P. T., & Rothstein, H. R. (2010). A basic introduction to fixed-effect and random-effects models for meta-analysis. Research Synthesis Methods, 1(2), 97–111. doi:10.1002/jrsm.12.CrossRefPubMed

Chalmers, I., Hedges, L. V., & Cooper, H. (2002). A brief history of research synthesis. Evaluation & the Health Professions, 25(1), 12–37. doi:10.1177/0163278702025001003.CrossRef

Cheung, M. W.-L. (2013). Multivariate meta-analysis as structural equation models. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 20(3), 429–454. doi:10.1080/10705511.2013.797827.CrossRef

Cheung, M. W.-L. (2014). Modeling dependent effect sizes with three-level meta-analyses: a structural equation modeling approach. Psychological Methods, 19(2), 211–229. doi:10.1037/a0032968.CrossRefPubMed

Cheung, M. W.-L. (2015a). Meta-analysis: A structural equation modeling approach. Chichester, West Sussex: John Wiley & Sons, Inc..CrossRef

Cheung, M. W.-L. (2015b). metaSEM: an R package for meta-analysis using structural equation modeling. Frontiers in Psychology, 5(1521). doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01521.

Cheung, M. W.-L., Ho, R. C. M., Lim, Y., & Mak, A. (2012). Conducting a meta-analysis: Basics and good practices. International Journal of Rheumatic Diseases, 15(2), 129–135. doi:10.1111/j.1756-185X.2012.01712.x

Cooper, H., & Hedges, L. V. (2009). Research synthesis as a scientific process. In H. Cooper, L. V. Hedges, & J. C. Valentine (Eds.), The handbook of research synthesis and meta-analysis (2nd ed., pp. 3–16). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

Cooper, H., Maxwell, S., Stone, A., & Sher, K. (2008). Reporting standards for research in psychology why do we need them? What might they be? American Psychologist, 63(9), 839–851. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.63.9.839.CrossRef

Cooper, H. M., Hedges, L. V., & Valentine, J. C. (2009). The handbook of research synthesis and meta-analysis (2nd ed.). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

Davey, J., Turner, R. M., Clarke, M. J., & Higgins, J. P. (2011). Characteristics of meta-analyses and their component studies in the Cochrane database of systematic reviews: a cross-sectional, descriptive analysis. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 11, 160. doi:10.1186/1471-2288-11-160.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Dewey, M. (2015). CRAN task view: Meta-analysis. Retrieved from http://CRAN.R-project.org/view=MetaAnalysis

Dickersin, K., Chan, S., Chalmersx, T. C., Sacks, H. S., & Smith, H. (1987). Publication bias and clinical trials. Controlled Clinical Trials, 8(4), 343–353. doi:10.1016/0197-2456(87)90155-3.CrossRefPubMed

Easterbrook, P. J., Gopalan, R., Berlin, J. A., & Matthews, D. R. (1991). Publication bias in clinical research. The Lancet, 337(8746), 867–872. doi:10.1016/0140-6736(91)90201-Y.CrossRef

Eysenck, H. J. (1978). An exercise in mega-silliness. American Psychologist, 33(5), 517.CrossRef

Ferguson, C. J., & Brannick, M. T. (2012). Publication bias in psychological science: prevalence, methods for identifying and controlling, and implications for the use of meta-analyses. Psychological Methods, 17(1), 120–128. doi:10.1037/a0024445.CrossRefPubMed

Fioravanti, M., Carlone, O., Vitale, B., Cinti, M. E., & Clare, L. (2005). A meta-analysis of cognitive deficits in adults with a diagnosis of schizophrenia. Neuropsychology Review, 15(2), 73–95. doi:10.1007/s11065-005-6254-9.CrossRefPubMed

Fleiss, J. L., & Berlin, J. A. (2009). Effect sizes for dichotomous data. In H. M. Cooper, L. V. Hedges, & J. C. Valentine (Eds.), The handbook of research synthesis and meta-analysis (2nd ed., pp. 237–253). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

Francis, G. (2013). Replication, statistical consistency, and publication bias. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 57(5), 153–169. doi:10.1016/j.jmp.2013.02.003.CrossRef

Glass, G. V. (1976). Primary, secondary, and meta-analysis of research. Educational Researcher, 5(10), 3–8. doi:10.2307/1174772.CrossRef

Harwell, M. (1997). An empirical study of Hedge’s homogeneity test. Psychological Methods, 2(2), 219–231. doi:10.1037/1082-989X.2.2.219.CrossRef

Hedges, L. V., & Olkin, I. (1985). Statistical methods for meta-analysis. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.

Hedges, L. V., & Pigott, T. D. (2001). The power of statistical tests in meta-analysis. Psychological Methods, 6(3), 203–217. doi:10.1037/1082-989X.6.3.203.CrossRefPubMed

Hedges, L. V., & Pigott, T. D. (2004). The power of statistical tests for moderators in meta-analysis. Psychological Methods, 9(4), 426–445. doi:10.1037/1082-989X.9.4.426.CrossRefPubMed

Higgins, J. P. T., & Thompson, S. G. (2002). Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. Statistics in Medicine, 21(11), 1539–1558. doi:10.1002/sim.1186.CrossRefPubMed

Higgins, J. P. T., Thompson, S. G., Deeks, J. J., & Altman, D. G. (2003). Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. British Medical Journal, 327(7414), 557–560.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Huedo-Medina, T. B., Sanchez-Meca, J., Marin-Martinez, F., & Botella, J. (2006). Assessing heterogeneity in meta-analysis. Q statistic or I2 index? Psychological Methods June 2006, 11(2), 193–206.PubMed

Hunt, M. (1997). How science takes stock: The story of meta-analysis. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

Koricheva, J., Gurevitch, J., & Mengersen, K. (Eds.) (2013). Handbook of meta-analysis in ecology and evolution. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Kupfersmid, J., & Fiala, M. (1991). A survey of attitudes and behaviors of authors who publish in psychology and education journals. American Psychologist, 46(3), 249–250. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.46.3.249.CrossRef

Liberati, A., Altman, D. G., Tetzlaff, J., Mulrow, C., Gotzsche, P. C., Ioannidis, J. P. A., et al. (2009). The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration. BMJ, 339(jul21 1), b2700–b2700. doi:10.1136/bmj.b2700.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Lindsay, D. S. (2015). Replication in psychological science. Psychological Science, 26(12), 1827–1832. doi:10.1177/0956797615616374.CrossRefPubMed

Lipsey, M. W., & Wilson, D. (2000). Practical meta-analysis. Sage Publications, Inc ,Thousand Oaks.

Littell, J. H., Corcoran, J., & Pillai, V. (2008). Systematic reviews and meta-analysis. Oxford University Press. Retrieved from http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/view/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195326543.001.0001/acprof-9780195326543

Lucas, R. E., & Brent Donnellan, M. (2013). Improving the replicability and reproducibility of research published in the journal of research in personality. Journal of Research in Personality, 47(4), 453–454. doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2013.05.002.CrossRef

Maxwell, S. E., Lau, M. Y., & Howard, G. S. (2015). Is psychology suffering from a replication crisis? What does “failure to replicate” really mean? American Psychologist, 70(6), 487–498. doi:10.1037/a0039400.CrossRefPubMed

Morris, S. B., & DeShon, R. P. (2002). Combining effect size estimates in meta-analysis with repeated measures and independent-groups designs. Psychological Methods, 7(1), 105–125. doi:10.1037/1082-989X.7.1.105.CrossRefPubMed

National Research Council (1992). Combining information: statistical issues and opportunities for research. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

O’Rourke, K. (2007). An historical perspective on meta-analysis: dealing quantitatively with varying study results. JRSM, 100(12), 579–582. doi:10.1258/jrsm.100.12.579.CrossRef

Open Science Collaboration (2012). An open, large-scale, collaborative effort to estimate the reproducibility of psychological science. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7(6), 657–660. doi:10.1177/1745691612462588.CrossRef

Open Science Collaboration (2015). Estimating the reproducibility of psychological. Science, 349(6251), aac4716. doi:10.1126/science.aac4716.CrossRef

Palmer, T. M., & Sterne, J. A. C. (Eds.) (2016). Meta-analysis: an updated collection from the Stata journal (2nd ed.). College Station: Stata Press.

Pearson, K. (1904). Report on certain enteric fever inoculation statistics. BMJ, 2(2288), 1243–1246. doi:10.1136/bmj.2.2288.1243.CrossRef

Pigott, T. D. (2012). Advances in meta-analysis. New York: Springer. Retrieved from http://www.springer.com.libproxy1.nus.edu.sg/statistics/social+sciences+%26+law/book/978-1-4614-2277-8

R Development Core Team. (2016). R: a language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria. Retrieved from http://www.R-project.org/

Reed, J. G., & Baxter, P. M. (2009). Using reference databases. In H. Cooper, L. V. Hedges, & J. C. Valentine (Eds.), The handbook of research synthesis and meta-analysis (2nd ed., pp. 73–101). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

Rothstein, H. R., & Bushman, B. J. (2012). Publication bias in psychological science: comment on Ferguson and Brannick (2012). Psychological Methods, 17(1), 129–136. doi:10.1037/a0027128.CrossRefPubMed

Rothstein, H. R., Sutton, A. J., & Borenstein, M. (2005). Publication bias in meta-analysis: Prevention, assessment and adjustments. Chichester: John Wiley and Sons.CrossRef

Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, J. E. (2015). Methods of meta-analysis: Correcting error and bias in research findings (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Shadish, W. R. (2015). Introduction to the special issue on the origins of modern meta-analysis. Research Synthesis Methods, 6(3), 219–220. doi:10.1002/jrsm.1148.CrossRefPubMed

Smith, M. L., & Glass, G. V. (1977). Meta-analysis of psychotherapy outcome studies. American Psychologist, 32(9), 752–760.CrossRefPubMed

Song, F., Parekh, S., Hooper, L., Loke, Y., Ryder, J., Sutton, A., et al. (2010). Dissemination and publication of research findings: an updated review of related biases. Health Technology Assessment, 14(8). doi:10.3310/hta14080.

Sterne, J. A. C., Egger, M., & Sutton, A. J. (2001). Meta-analysis software. In M. Egger, G. D. Smith, & D. G. Altman (Eds.), Systematic Reviews in Health Care: Meta-Analysis in Context (pp. 336–346). London: BMJ Publishing Group. Retrieved from doi:10.1002/9780470693926.ch17/summary

Valentine, J. C., Pigott, T. D., & Rothstein, H. R. (2010). How many studies do you need? A primer on statistical power for meta-analysis. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 35(2), 215–247. doi:10.3102/1076998609346961.CrossRef

Viechtbauer, W. (2007). Hypothesis tests for population heterogeneity in meta-analysis. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 60(1), 29–60. doi:10.1348/000711005X64042.CrossRefPubMed

Wallace, B. C., Schmid, C. H., Lau, J., & Trikalinos, T. A. (2009). Meta-analyst: software for meta-analysis of binary, continuous and diagnostic data. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 9(1), 80. doi:10.1186/1471-2288-9-80.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Weare, K., & Nind, M. (2011). Mental health promotion and problem prevention in schools: what does the evidence say? Health Promotion International, 26(suppl 1), i29–i69. doi:10.1093/heapro/dar075.CrossRefPubMed

Titel: A Guide to Conducting a Meta-Analysis
verfasst von: Mike W.-L. Cheung
Ranjith Vijayakumar
Publikationsdatum: 21.05.2016
Verlag: Springer US
Erschienen in: Neuropsychology Review / Ausgabe 2/2016
Print ISSN: 1040-7308
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-6660
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11065-016-9319-z

Leitlinien kompakt für die Neurologie

Mit medbee Pocketcards sicher entscheiden.

^{Seit 2022 gehört die medbee GmbH zum Springer Medizin Verlag}

Kostenlos registrieren

Neu im Fachgebiet Neurologie

Sozialer Aufstieg verringert Demenzgefahr

24.05.2024 Demenz Nachrichten

Ein hohes soziales Niveau ist mit die beste Versicherung gegen eine Demenz. Noch geringer ist das Demenzrisiko für Menschen, die sozial aufsteigen: Sie gewinnen fast zwei demenzfreie Lebensjahre. Umgekehrt steigt die Demenzgefahr beim sozialen Abstieg.

Hirnblutung unter DOAK und VKA ähnlich bedrohlich

17.05.2024 Direkte orale Antikoagulanzien Nachrichten

Kommt es zu einer nichttraumatischen Hirnblutung, spielt es keine große Rolle, ob die Betroffenen zuvor direkt wirksame orale Antikoagulanzien oder Marcumar bekommen haben: Die Prognose ist ähnlich schlecht.

Was nützt die Kraniektomie bei schwerer tiefer Hirnblutung?

17.05.2024 Hirnblutung Nachrichten

Eine Studie zum Nutzen der druckentlastenden Kraniektomie nach schwerer tiefer supratentorieller Hirnblutung deutet einen Nutzen der Operation an. Für überlebende Patienten ist das dennoch nur eine bedingt gute Nachricht.

Thrombektomie auch bei großen Infarkten von Vorteil

16.05.2024 Ischämischer Schlaganfall Nachrichten

Auch ein sehr ausgedehnter ischämischer Schlaganfall scheint an sich kein Grund zu sein, von einer mechanischen Thrombektomie abzusehen. Dafür spricht die LASTE-Studie, an der Patienten und Patientinnen mit einem ASPECTS von maximal 5 beteiligt waren.

Update Neurologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen

Live-Webinar "Urologie und Sexualmedizin in der Praxis"

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 2/2016

Weighing the Evidence: A Systematic Review on Long-Term Neurocognitive Effects of Cannabis Use in Abstinent Adolescents and Adults

Social Cognition in Multiple Sclerosis: a Meta-Analysis

Resilience and Other Possible Outcomes After Mild Traumatic Brain Injury: a Systematic Review

Editorial

Functional Disability in Mild Cognitive Impairment: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis