Comparative role of various methods of estimating between study variance for meta-analysis using random effect method

Mona Pathak, Sada Nand Dwivedi, Bhaskar Thakur

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

3 Scopus citations

Abstract

Methods of synthesizing the effect size is guided by observed heterogeneity. As a convention, fixed effect method (FEM) is used for low/no heterogeneity. However, random effect method (REM) is used for substantial heterogeneity. But, synthesized (i.e., pooled) effect size under REM also relies on the method used to estimate between study variance along with within study variance. There are various methods to assess between study variance to be used under REM. Accordingly, present study compared existing methods of estimating between study variance on the basis of coverage probability and precision in order to find preferred method of assessing between study variance. Data from a systematic review and meta-analysis for various outcomes involving varying extent of sample size and heterogeneity was used. Hunter and Schmidt method and DerSimonnian & Laird method were found as preferred methods to estimate between study variance.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)185-189
Number of pages5
JournalClinical Epidemiology and Global Health
Volume8
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 2020
Externally publishedYes

Keywords

  • Coverage probability
  • DerSimonnian & Laird method
  • Hazard ratio
  • Meta-analysis
  • Random effect method

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Epidemiology
  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
  • Microbiology (medical)
  • Infectious Diseases

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Comparative role of various methods of estimating between study variance for meta-analysis using random effect method'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this