Heterogeneity estimation in meta-analysis of standardized mean differences when the distribution of random effects departs from normal: A Monte Carlo simulation study

被引:6
|
作者
Blazquez-Rincon, Desiree [1 ]
Sanchez-Meca, Julio [1 ]
Botella, Juan [2 ]
Suero, Manuel [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Murcia, Fac Psychol, Dept Basic Psychol & Methodol, Murcia, Spain
[2] Autonomous Univ Madrid, Fac Psychol, Dept Social Psychol & Methodol, Madrid, Spain
关键词
Heterogeneity; Non-normality; Random effects; Meta-analysis; Between-study variance; Simulation study; BETWEEN-STUDY HETEROGENEITY; RANDOM-EFFECTS MODEL; VARIANCE ESTIMATORS; STATISTICAL-METHODS; PERFORMANCE; TRUE; BIAS;
D O I
10.1186/s12874-022-01809-0
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Background Advantages of meta-analysis depend on the assumptions underlying the statistical procedures used being met. One of the main assumptions that is usually taken for granted is the normality underlying the population of true effects in a random-effects model, even though the available evidence suggests that this assumption is often not met. This paper examines how 21 frequentist and 24 Bayesian methods, including several novel procedures, for computing a point estimate of the heterogeneity parameter (tau(2)) perform when the distribution of random effects departs from normality compared to normal scenarios in meta-analysis of standardized mean differences. Methods A Monte Carlo simulation was carried out using the R software, generating data for meta-analyses using the standardized mean difference. The simulation factors were the number and average sample size of primary studies, the amount of heterogeneity, as well as the shape of the random-effects distribution. The point estimators were compared in terms of absolute bias and variance, although results regarding mean squared error were also discussed. Results Although not all the estimators were affected to the same extent, there was a general tendency to obtain lower and more variable tau(2) estimates as the random-effects distribution departed from normality. However, the estimators ranking in terms of their absolute bias and variance did not change: Those estimators that obtained lower bias also showed greater variance. Finally, a large number and sample size of primary studies acted as a bias-protective factor against a lack of normality for several procedures, whereas only a high number of studies was a variance -protective factor for most of the estimators analyzed. Conclusions Although the estimation and inference of the combined effect have proven to be sufficiently robust, our work highlights the role that the deviation from normality may be playing in the meta-analytic conclusions from the simulation results and the numerical examples included in this work. With the aim to exercise caution in the interpretation of the results obtained from random-effects models, the tau2() R function is made available for obtaining the range of tau(2) values computed from the 45 estimators analyzed in this work, as well as to assess how the pooled effect, its confidence and prediction intervals vary according to the estimator chosen.
引用
下载
收藏
页数:22
相关论文
共 37 条
  • [21] Bias, coverage, and asymptotic behaviour of random effects meta-analysis: a clinically driven simulation study
    Johnson, Kent
    Hayen, Andrew
    Lassere, Marissa N. D.
    Mengersen, Kerrie
    JBI EVIDENCE IMPLEMENTATION, 2020, 18 (04): : 355 - 367
  • [22] An alternative model for bivariate random-effects meta-analysis when the within-study correlations are unknown
    Riley, Richard D.
    Thompson, John R.
    Abrams, Keith R.
    BIOSTATISTICS, 2008, 9 (01) : 172 - 186
  • [23] Confidence intervals for the between-study variance in random effects meta-analysis using generalised Cochran heterogeneity statistics
    Jackson, Dan
    RESEARCH SYNTHESIS METHODS, 2013, 4 (03) : 220 - 229
  • [24] Application of hierarchical linear models to meta-analysis: Study of the Monte Carlo simulation on the functioning of traditional and empirical-Bayes effect size
    Castro, M
    Gaviria, JL
    QUALITY & QUANTITY, 2000, 34 (01) : 33 - 50
  • [25] Application of Hierarchical Linear Models to Meta-Analysis: Study of the Monte Carlo Simulation on the Functioning of Traditional and Empirical-Bayes Effect Size
    María Castro
    José-luis Gaviria
    Quality and Quantity, 2000, 34 : 33 - 50
  • [26] Performance of statistical methods for meta-analysis when true study effects are non-normally distributed: A simulation study
    Kontopantelis, Evangelos
    Reeves, David
    STATISTICAL METHODS IN MEDICAL RESEARCH, 2012, 21 (04) : 409 - 426
  • [27] Comparison of random-effects meta-analysis models for the relative risk in the case of rare events: A simulation study
    Beisemann, Marie
    Doebler, Philipp
    Holling, Heinz
    BIOMETRICAL JOURNAL, 2020, 62 (07) : 1597 - 1630
  • [28] Aflatoxin M1 in human breast milk: A global systematic review, meta-analysis, and risk assessment study (Monte Carlo simulation)
    Fakhri, Yadolah
    Rahmani, Jamal
    Fernandes Oliveira, Carlos Augusto
    Franco, Larissa Tuanny
    Corassin, Carlos Humberto
    Saba, Sumbal
    Rafique, Jamal
    Khaneghah, Amin Mousavi
    TRENDS IN FOOD SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY, 2019, 88 : 333 - 342
  • [29] A Method to Estimate the Efficacy vs. Effectiveness in Meta-Analysis of Clinical Trials with Different Adherence Scenarios: A Monte Carlo Simulation Study in Nutrition
    Angel Lopez-Espinoza, Miguel
    Antonio Lozano-Lozano, Jose
    Prieto-Merino, David
    NUTRIENTS, 2021, 13 (07)
  • [30] A Monte Carlo simulation study of two-sided tolerance intervals in balanced one-way random effects model for non-normal errors
    Pathmanathan, Dharini
    Ong, S. H.
    JOURNAL OF STATISTICAL COMPUTATION AND SIMULATION, 2014, 84 (11) : 2329 - 2344