Skip to content
Prev 4894 / 5636 Next

[R-meta] Meta-analysis of within-subject experimental designs with multiple treatment factors?

Hi Elmar,

The example code you provided checks out as far as I can see. Your approach
seems reasonable to me, although I also see two ways that it could be
refined:

* You've assumed a constant correlation of 0.6 between the sampling errors
of the effect size estimates from a given study. This assumption could
potentially be refined depending on how much information you have about the
study results. If you had access or could gain access to the raw data, you
could calculate better estimates of the variance-covariance matrix of these
effect estimates.

* You've used what I call the "correlated-and-hierarchical effects" working
model, which includes random effects for each individual effect and random
effects for each study. This working model assumes that 1) the overall
variation in each type of effect is constant across all four types (i.e.,
between-study heterogeneity of slope_A is the same as the between-study
heterogeneity of slope_B, likewise for slope_C1 and slope_C2) and that 2)
there is a constant correlation between the study-specific true effects of
each pair of effect types--that is, cor(slope_A, slope_B) is the same as
cor(slope_A, slope_C1) and cor(slope_A, slope_C2) and cor(slope_B,
slope_C1), etc. If you have a fair number studies, you could consider using
a more general, multivariate working model, which would loosen both of the
above assumptions. The syntax is just as above, but with random effects
specified as
random = ~ coeff_name | study, struct = "UN"

James

On Thu, Sep 14, 2023 at 4:55?AM Schl?ter, Elmar via R-sig-meta-analysis <
r-sig-meta-analysis at r-project.org> wrote: