Skip to content
Prev 2387 / 5636 Next

[R-meta] Multilevel Meta-regression with Multiple Level Covariates

This is an interesting framework (GEE that is) that I was not previously
familiar with. I appreciate bringing my attention to this. I agree that a
binomial distribution is more intuitive to what I'm trying to answer. If I
had actual, item-level data for a sample (i.e., each participant's
responses -- either 0 or 1 -- to each item), then I would use GLMM assuming
a binomial, though really Bernoulli, distribution to do an item response
theory model. The idea of doing this meta-analysis actually came from
trying to figure out how to do that kind of analysis on summary level data
since I don't have that individual-level data.

For my own edification, is this something that is doable in metafor? I
don't see how to specify a non-gaussian distribution in rma.mv, but I'm
also no expert on the metafor package. Cursory googling brought my
attention to gee and geepack packages for R, but it doesn't seem like it's
possible to include more than one cluster in those packages. I could do
this in lme4, but I believe that their estimation method is still
inappropriate for meta-analysis (though maybe this has been changed? it's
been a while since I looked at multilevel meta-analysis in lme4 since rma.mv
works so well).

Also, is there any guidance on how many studies should be collected for
these kinds of analyses? I suspect that this is a relatively specific
meta-analysis, and it sounds like rules-of-thumbs will be biased if the
distribution of moderators is restricted or sparse. Any good Monte Carlo
simulation methods that could be used to check the extent to which the
model has too few studies to estimate the various moderators?
On Mon, Sep 28, 2020 at 8:17 PM James Pustejovsky <jepusto at gmail.com> wrote: