Paper detail

Simulation Models for Aggregated Data Meta-Analysis: Evaluation of Pooling Effect Sizes and Publication Biases

Simulation studies are commonly used to evaluate the performance of newly developed meta-analysis methods. For methodology that is developed for an aggregated data meta-analysis, researchers often resort to simulation of the aggregated data directly, instead of simulating individual participant data from which the aggregated data would be calculated in reality. Clearly, distributional characteristics of the aggregated data statistics may be derived from distributional assumptions of the underlying individual data, but they are often not made explicit in publications. This paper provides the distribution of the aggregated data statistics that were derived from a heteroscedastic mixed effects model for continuous individual data. As a result, we provide a procedure for directly simulating the aggregated data statistics. We also compare our distributional findings with other simulation approaches of aggregated data used in literature by describing their theoretical differences and by conducting a simulation study for three meta-analysis methods: DerSimonian and Laird's pooled estimate and the Trim & Fill and PET-PEESE method for adjustment of publication bias. We demonstrate that the choices of simulation model for aggregated data may have a relevant impact on (the conclusions of) the performance of the meta-analysis method. We recommend the use of multiple aggregated data simulation models for investigation of new methodology to determine sensitivity or otherwise make the individual participant data model explicit that would lead to the distributional choices of the aggregated data statistics used in the simulation.

preprint2022arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.