Technically, you may conduct a meta-analysis of these two effects and
obtain something between. The question is how to interpret this.
Best,
Gerta
Am 03.05.2021 um 19:06 schrieb Michael Dewey:
Yes, exactly. After all if you show two things are different you
cannot say they are the same.
Michael
On 03/05/2021 15:59, Gladys Barragan-Jason wrote:
Okay, so you can't obtain an overall effect size while controlling
for design?
Le lun. 3 mai 2021 ? 14:36, Michael Dewey <lists at dewey.myzen.co.uk
<mailto:lists at dewey.myzen.co.uk>> a ?crit :
If you include a moderator you do not get an overall effect
because by
including it you are effectively saying there is no single overall
effect.
On 03/05/2021 12:24, Gladys Barragan-Jason wrote:
> Hi Michael,
> Thanks a lot for your quick response. Here are answers and other
> questions below.
>
> Le lun. 3 mai 2021 ? 12:41, Michael Dewey
<lists at dewey.myzen.co.uk <mailto:lists at dewey.myzen.co.uk>
> <mailto:lists at dewey.myzen.co.uk
<mailto:lists at dewey.myzen.co.uk>>> a ?crit :
>
> Dear Gladys
>
> Comments in-line
>
> On 03/05/2021 08:13, Gladys Barragan-Jason wrote:
> > Dear all,
> >
> > I am doing a meta-analysis on experimental data on the
> > several behavioral interventions including both *pre-post
> > (measurement of a trait before and after the intervention)
> > vs. treatment studies *(measurement after a control
> > measurement after the intervention).
>
> So the first design just has one group which is measured
> second design has two parallel groups which are each measured
> > I am interested in the effect size of each type of
> > specific trait that is common to all studies.
> >
> > I would like to know whether it is correct to compile all
> > one type of intervention (whatever the type of
> > control vs. treatment group together) with pre- and
> > control and post and treatment being as treatment.
> >
>
> I do not think that is going to work well. Although the two
> could be considered as estimating the same effect their
> should be very different since in design 1 you have reduced
> of individual variability. If you do include both designs
> analysis I would have thought it mandatory to include a
> two levels for design.
>
> This makes sense. When I do this, I then obtain two effect sizes
> for each design); (in having mods=~design-1). Do you know how I
> the overall effect size?
>
>
> > I have a second question about how to thank the
> > r-sig-meta-analysis at r-project.org
<mailto:r-sig-meta-analysis at r-project.org>
> <mailto:r-sig-meta-analysis at r-project.org
<mailto:r-sig-meta-analysis at r-project.org>>
> > <mailto:r-sig-meta-analysis at r-project.org
<mailto:r-sig-meta-analysis at r-project.org>
> <mailto:r-sig-meta-analysis at r-project.org
<mailto:r-sig-meta-analysis at r-project.org>>> list for all their
> > (acknowledgements in a paper).
> was better. How to do this will also depend on custom and
> your scientific discipline, some journals in mine require
> are
> acknowledged to give their consent.
>
>
> Ok! Thanks a lot!
>
> Best,
> Gladys
>
>
> Michael
>
> >
> > Station d'Ecologie Th?orique et Exp?rimentale (SETE)____
> >
> > CNRS de Moulis____
> >
> > image.pngimage.png____
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > R-sig-meta-analysis mailing list
> > R-sig-meta-analysis at r-project.org
<mailto:R-sig-meta-analysis at r-project.org>
> <mailto:R-sig-meta-analysis at r-project.org
<mailto:R-sig-meta-analysis at r-project.org>>
>
> Station d'Ecologie Th?orique et Exp?rimentale (SETE)____
>
> CNRS de Moulis____
>
> image.pngimage.png____
>
>
>