{"title":"Simulation study of estimating between-study variance and overall effect in meta-analyses of log-response-ratio for normal data","authors":"Ilyas Bakbergenuly, D. Hoaglin, E. Kulinskaya","doi":"10.31222/osf.io/3bnxs","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Methods for random-effects meta-analysis require an estimate of the between-study variance, $\\tau^2$. The performance of estimators of $\\tau^2$ (measured by bias and coverage) affects their usefulness in assessing heterogeneity of study-level effects, and also the performance of related estimators of the overall effect. For the effect measure log-response-ratio (LRR, also known as the logarithm of the ratio of means, RoM), we review four point estimators of $\\tau^2$ (the popular methods of DerSimonian-Laird (DL), restricted maximum likelihood, and Mandel and Paule (MP), and the less-familiar method of Jackson), four interval estimators for $\\tau^2$ (profile likelihood, Q-profile, Biggerstaff and Jackson, and Jackson), five point estimators of the overall effect (the four related to the point estimators of $\\tau^2$ and an estimator whose weights use only study-level sample sizes), and seven interval estimators for the overall effect (four based on the point estimators for $\\tau^2$, the Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman (HKSJ) interval, a modification of HKSJ that uses the MP estimator of $\\tau^2$ instead of the DL estimator, and an interval based on the sample-size-weighted estimator). We obtain empirical evidence from extensive simulations of data from normal distributions. Simulations from lognormal distributions are in a separate report Bakbergenuly et al. 2019b.","PeriodicalId":186390,"journal":{"name":"arXiv: Methodology","volume":"30 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-05-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"arXiv: Methodology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31222/osf.io/3bnxs","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4
Abstract
Methods for random-effects meta-analysis require an estimate of the between-study variance, $\tau^2$. The performance of estimators of $\tau^2$ (measured by bias and coverage) affects their usefulness in assessing heterogeneity of study-level effects, and also the performance of related estimators of the overall effect. For the effect measure log-response-ratio (LRR, also known as the logarithm of the ratio of means, RoM), we review four point estimators of $\tau^2$ (the popular methods of DerSimonian-Laird (DL), restricted maximum likelihood, and Mandel and Paule (MP), and the less-familiar method of Jackson), four interval estimators for $\tau^2$ (profile likelihood, Q-profile, Biggerstaff and Jackson, and Jackson), five point estimators of the overall effect (the four related to the point estimators of $\tau^2$ and an estimator whose weights use only study-level sample sizes), and seven interval estimators for the overall effect (four based on the point estimators for $\tau^2$, the Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman (HKSJ) interval, a modification of HKSJ that uses the MP estimator of $\tau^2$ instead of the DL estimator, and an interval based on the sample-size-weighted estimator). We obtain empirical evidence from extensive simulations of data from normal distributions. Simulations from lognormal distributions are in a separate report Bakbergenuly et al. 2019b.