Message-ID: <CACgv6yW_EU7KzfvE4iywyf61dBRTH+yzGv2mnCxpvHpjZMawdw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: 2022-01-21T14:17:03Z
From: Simon Harmel
Subject: [R-meta] Does QE statistic in rma.mv() account for random effects as well?
In-Reply-To: <4b117932-b8cc-65fb-93e5-c882cf94a8a9@uni-osnabrueck.de>
Thank you for your response.
On Fri, Jan 21, 2022, 6:39 AM Lukasz Stasielowicz <
lukasz.stasielowicz at uni-osnabrueck.de> wrote:
> Dear Simon,
>
> if you compare the output of a simple fixed effect model to a simple
> random effects model then you can see that the QE value is the same.
>
> A reproducible example:
>
> library(metafor)
> rma(data=dat.bangertdrowns2004,yi,vi,mods=~length,method="FE")
> rma(data=dat.bangertdrowns2004,yi,vi,mods=~length,method="REML")
>
> "Test for Residual Heterogeneity:
> QE(df = 44) = 96.2810, p-val < .0001"
>
> In other words. Random effects do not influence the QE value.
>
> You can also see it in the code that Wolfgang provides via github:
> https://github.com/cran/metafor/blob/master/R/rma.mv.r (line 1500)
>
>
> For some conceptual clarifications see also this paper:
> Pastor, D. A., & Lazowski, R. A. (2017). On the multilevel nature of
> meta-analysis: A tutorial, comparison of software programs, and
> discussion of analytic choices. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 52(6),
> 789?804. https://doi.org/10.1080/00273171.2017.1365684
>
>
>
> Best,
> Lukasz
> --
> Lukasz Stasielowicz
> Osnabr?ck University
> Institute for Psychology
> Research methods, psychological assessment, and evaluation
> Seminarstra?e 20
> 49074 Osnabr?ck (Germany)
>
> Am 21.01.2022 um 12:00 schrieb r-sig-meta-analysis-request at r-project.org:
> > Send R-sig-meta-analysis mailing list submissions to
> > r-sig-meta-analysis at r-project.org
> >
> > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-sig-meta-analysis
> > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> > r-sig-meta-analysis-request at r-project.org
> >
> > You can reach the person managing the list at
> > r-sig-meta-analysis-owner at r-project.org
> >
> > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> > than "Re: Contents of R-sig-meta-analysis digest..."
> >
> >
> > Today's Topics:
> >
> > 1. Does QE statistic in rma.mv() account for random effects as
> > well? (Simon Harmel)
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > Message: 1
> > Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2022 21:01:56 -0600
> > From: Simon Harmel <sim.harmel at gmail.com>
> > To: R meta <r-sig-meta-analysis at r-project.org>
> > Subject: [R-meta] Does QE statistic in rma.mv() account for random
> > effects as well?
> > Message-ID:
> > <CACgv6yX9xozyJV5Nbd+dmh75UYjaGjXKwCk=
> Q3T_084jpNA1hg at mail.gmail.com>
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
> >
> > Dear Meta-Analysis Experts,
> >
> > I'm running a multilevel model with metafor's rma.mv().
> >
> > Does the QE statistic (Test for Residual Heterogeneity) reported by
> rma.mv(),
> > in addition to the variance explained by moderators, also account for the
> > variance components explained by random-effects (Sigmas, Taus, & Gammas)?
> >
> > In other words, a significant QE in such models suggests that the true
> > effects are heterogeneous beyond what has been explained by moderators
> AND
> > random components OR just moderators?
> >
> > Thank you,
> > Simon
> >
> > [[alternative HTML version deleted]]
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------
> >
> > Subject: Digest Footer
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > R-sig-meta-analysis mailing list
> > R-sig-meta-analysis at r-project.org
> > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-sig-meta-analysis
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------
> >
> > End of R-sig-meta-analysis Digest, Vol 56, Issue 18
> > ***************************************************
>
[[alternative HTML version deleted]]