Skip to content
Prev 2312 / 5636 Next

[R-meta] Standard Error of an effect size for use in longitudinal meta-analysis

Dear Wolfang,

Many thanks for your confirmation! I have some follow-up questions.

(1) I believe "dppc" is biased and requires a correction, so does its
sampling variance, right?

(2) If "dppc" and "dppt" (along with their sampling variances) are each
biased and must be corrected, then, we don't need to again correct the
sampling variance of "d_dif" (i.e., dppt - dppc)?

(3) Do you see any advantage or disadvantage for using "d_dif" in
longitudinal meta-analysis where studies that have a control group?

[In terms of advantages:
 a- I think logistically using "d_dif" will reduce the number of effect
sizes that are otherwise usually computed from such studies by half,
 b- "d_dif"'s metric seems to better suit the repeated measures design used
in the primary studies,
 c- "d_dif" seems to allow for investigating (by using appropriate
moderators) the threats to the internal validity (regression to mean,
history, maturation, testing) say when the primary studies didn't use
random assignment of subjects (i.e., nonequivalent groups designs)

In terms disadvantages:
 a- I think obtaining "r", the correlation bet. pre- and post-tests to
compute "dppc" and "dppt" is a bit difficult,
 b- while "d_dif"'s metric seems to better suit the repeated measures
design used in the primary studies, most applied meta-analysts are not used
to such a metric.
]

On Tue, Aug 11, 2020 at 2:04 PM Viechtbauer, Wolfgang (SP) <
wolfgang.viechtbauer at maastrichtuniversity.nl> wrote: