{"title":"Meta-analysis and partial correlation coefficients: A matter of weights","authors":"Sanghyun Hong, W. Robert Reed","doi":"10.1002/jrsm.1697","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>This study builds on the simulation framework of a recent paper by Stanley and Doucouliagos (<i>Research Synthesis Methods</i> 2023;14;515–519). S&D use simulations to make the argument that meta-analyses using partial correlation coefficients (PCCs) should employ a “suboptimal” estimator of the PCC standard error when constructing weights for fixed effect and random effects estimation. We address concerns that their simulations and subsequent recommendation may give meta-analysts a misleading impression. While the estimator they promote dominates the “correct” formula in their Monte Carlo framework, there are other estimators that perform even better. We conclude that more research is needed before best practice recommendations can be made for meta-analyses with PCCs.</p>","PeriodicalId":226,"journal":{"name":"Research Synthesis Methods","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/jrsm.1697","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research Synthesis Methods","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jrsm.1697","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MATHEMATICAL & COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This study builds on the simulation framework of a recent paper by Stanley and Doucouliagos (Research Synthesis Methods 2023;14;515–519). S&D use simulations to make the argument that meta-analyses using partial correlation coefficients (PCCs) should employ a “suboptimal” estimator of the PCC standard error when constructing weights for fixed effect and random effects estimation. We address concerns that their simulations and subsequent recommendation may give meta-analysts a misleading impression. While the estimator they promote dominates the “correct” formula in their Monte Carlo framework, there are other estimators that perform even better. We conclude that more research is needed before best practice recommendations can be made for meta-analyses with PCCs.
期刊介绍：
Research Synthesis Methods is a reputable, peer-reviewed journal that focuses on the development and dissemination of methods for conducting systematic research synthesis. Our aim is to advance the knowledge and application of research synthesis methods across various disciplines.
Our journal provides a platform for the exchange of ideas and knowledge related to designing, conducting, analyzing, interpreting, reporting, and applying research synthesis. While research synthesis is commonly practiced in the health and social sciences, our journal also welcomes contributions from other fields to enrich the methodologies employed in research synthesis across scientific disciplines.
By bridging different disciplines, we aim to foster collaboration and cross-fertilization of ideas, ultimately enhancing the quality and effectiveness of research synthesis methods. Whether you are a researcher, practitioner, or stakeholder involved in research synthesis, our journal strives to offer valuable insights and practical guidance for your work.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
