Topic summary

A pooled estimate that changed when one trial was added

Evidence › Meta-analyses meta-analysis publication bias effect size Solved

This is a generated summary. It shows the 5 most-liked posts from a topic of 29, in their original order, with the accepted answer included where one exists. It is a reading aid and it will miss nuance — the full topic is the record.

il.dumitruTL222 May 2026#2

Taking the opening post at face value and following it one step further.

I keep a log for pooled estimate specifically because my memory of it turned out to be systematically wrong in one direction. Six weeks of notes cost nothing and settled it.

27 likes 2mo

j.dahlbergTL2 Solution12 Jun 2026#9

Search strategy determines what was found and is the part of the method least often scrutinised. A search restricted to one language or one database is a selection step.

9 likes 2mo

r.villalobosTL220 Jun 2026#12

Everything in post #11 holds. The case it does not cover is the one I have.

Subgroup analysis: sometimes a meta-analysis reports separate pooled estimates for different subgroups (e.g., by baseline body mass index or by trial duration). Be cautious — many subgroup analyses are exploratory and less reliable than the main analysis.

28 likes 1mo

r.aldana_pharmdTL4Pharmacist6 Jul 2026#19

Double extraction with disagreement resolution is standard and is worth checking for, because single extraction errors are common and non-random.

27 likes 22d

z.okonkwoTL224 Jul 2026#28

s.balogun, post #24: Why forest plots are more informative than pooled numbers: they show the variation across studies, which tells you whether the effect is consistent or heterogeneous. A narrow confidence interval around a meaningless centre is less useful than a wider interval that shows real differences. That is where I would start, not where I would… Go to post

Inclusion and exclusion criteria: a meta-analysis is only as good as its inclusion criteria. If the criteria are too broad, apples and oranges get pooled. If they are too narrow, the meta-analysis answers a overly specific question.

30 likes in reply to #24 4d

Read the full topic (29 posts)

Suggested topics

Topic	Participants	Replies	Views	Activity
Revisiting: What pooling buys you and what it destroys Evidence › Meta-analyses heterogeneity effect size publication bias Solved On the subject in the title: Revisiting: What pooling buys you and what it destroys Working notes rather than a conclusion. Pooling buys — I have the observation and I do not trust my interpretation of it, so…	+97	107	4k	19h
Second pass at: When a network meta-analysis is defensible and when it is not Evidence › Meta-analyses heterogeneity meta-analysis effect size publication bias Solved Pinned Posting this under the heading it deserves: Second pass at: When a network meta-analysis is defensible and when it is not Everything below is what sits behind that. Posting a small dataset on network…		2	2.8k	21mo
Random versus fixed effects: choosing rather than defaulting — a second dataset Evidence › Meta-analyses heterogeneity risk of bias publication bias On the subject in the title: Random versus fixed effects: choosing rather than defaulting — a second dataset Working notes rather than a conclusion. Posting a small dataset on Random versus fixed effects. It…	+95	106	20k	17mo
Coming back to: Prediction intervals and why they are more honest than confidence intervals Evidence › Meta-analyses publication bias heterogeneity effect size risk of bias Prediction intervals and why they are more honest than confidence intervals Writing it up because I had to work it out twice and would rather nobody else did. Prediction intervals — I have the observation and…		2	65	22mo
About the Meta-analyses category Evidence › Meta-analyses meta-analysis heterogeneity publication bias Pinned Wiki Pooled estimates, heterogeneity, publication bias, and when pooling was a mistake. This post is a community wiki: any member at trust level 3 or above can edit it, and every edit is recorded with its author…		4	15k	13mo

Related topics — sharing the tags meta-analysis, publication bias, effect size

Topic	Participants	Replies	Views	Activity
Journal club: SURPASS-2 and the semaglutide 1 mg comparator Evidence › Journal club estimand effect size risk of bias journal club Solved On the subject in the title: Journal club: SURPASS-2 and the semaglutide 1 mg comparator Working notes rather than a conclusion. Session topic: SURPASS-2 ( N Engl J Med , 2021). Please read it before posting;…	+71	76	52k	21mo
Individual participant data versus aggregate data Evidence › Meta-analyses heterogeneity risk of bias meta-analysis publication bias Posting this under the heading it deserves: Individual participant data versus aggregate data Everything below is what sits behind that. Something about individual participant data versus aggregate does not…	+30	34	64k	14mo
Follow-up: Individual participant data versus aggregate data Evidence › Meta-analyses meta-analysis effect size publication bias heterogeneity Individual participant data versus aggregate data — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. A follow-up question about Individual participant data versus aggregate that I did not…	+101	111	23k	18mo
Journal club: STEP 1 and the treatment-policy estimand — does this still hold? Evidence › Journal club randomised trial risk of bias effect size journal club Asking directly, because I could not find a straight answer: Journal club: STEP 1 and the treatment-policy estimand — does this still hold? Working notes on STEP 1 rather than a conclusion. I would rather…	+70	76	4.8k	15h
Journal club: SELECT, absolute risk, and how it was reported Evidence › Journal club journal club estimand randomised trial effect size Journal club: SELECT, absolute risk, and how it was reported Writing it up because I had to work it out twice and would rather nobody else did. A question about what the numbers mean rather than what they…		2	52k	1mo