The Peptide CommonsEst. May 2024
Independent. We sell nothing and are affiliated with no manufacturer or pharmacy. Every moderation action is logged in public
Evidence · Meta-analyses · continued

Heterogeneity as information rather than as a nuisance posts 91–96

This is a continuation of a long topic, addressed by post number rather than by page. Start at post 1.

M
MJayawardenaTL3Regular5 Feb 2026#91
electrolyte_notes, post #81: Building on post #80 rather than restating it. Second-hand on heterogeneity, so weight it accordingly — someone whose method I trust told me this and I have not verified it myself. Go to post

High heterogeneity is the finding rather than a nuisance to be minimised. If the effect genuinely differs across settings, an average of those settings is an average of things that should not have been averaged.

21 likes in reply to #81 6mo
NZ
n.zielinskiTL26 Feb 2026#92
n.bridgewater, post #62: Post #60 describes the usual case. This is about the unusual one. Where I would push back on the heterogeneity consensus is the confidence, not the direction. The direction looks right. The confidence is borrowed. Go to post

Building on post #89 rather than restating it.

Careful with the language on heterogeneity. "Not detected" and "not present" are different findings and the first is a statement about the method.

9 likes in reply to #62 6mo
EM
endpoint_marginTL2Member7 Feb 2026#93

Having read the whole heterogeneity thread before replying: the question in the first post has not actually been answered yet, and three of us have answered a nearby one instead.

2 likes 6mo
BT
b.teixeiraTL28 Feb 2026#94

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

0 likes 6mo
ED
e.dalgleishTL3Regular8 Feb 2026#95
DOdendaal, post #1: Posting this under the heading it deserves: Heterogeneity as information rather than as a nuisance Everything below is what sits behind that. An honest uncertainty about heterogeneity rather than a disguised assertion. I do not know the answer and I have not been able to find one. What I have is the shape of the question, which may be… Go to post

Post #93 and I disagree about the size of the effect, not about the direction.

The thing about heterogeneity that took me longest to accept is that a plausible mechanism is not evidence of an effect. It is a reason to look, not a result.

29 likes in reply to #1 6mo
AK
ar.kravchenkoTL29 Feb 2026#96

Adding thanks rather than a view. I do not have a view worth the space.

14 likes 6mo

Suggested topics

TopicParticipantsRepliesViewsActivity
About the Meta-analyses category
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…
SLDOERZSIT 4 15k 13mo
Revisiting: What pooling buys you and what it destroys
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…
JWZAEFIGGF+97 107 4k 19h
Coming back to: Reading a meta-analysis you disagree with, fairly
Reading a meta-analysis you disagree with, fairly Writing it up because I had to work it out twice and would rather nobody else did. Reading a meta-analysis — I have the observation and I do not trust my…
TVBDJIPMCT+30 34 9.3k 17mo
Pooling trials with different estimands — what changed since
Pooling trials with different estimands — what changed since — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. What changes if the standard account of Pooling trials with different…
BERRMLDYAW+57 64 12k 7mo
Individual participant data versus aggregate data
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…
EAKBTEMAK+30 34 64k 14mo

Related topics — sharing the tags heterogeneity, risk of bias, meta-analysis

TopicParticipantsRepliesViewsActivity
Is there a ceiling dose beyond which semaglutide stops adding benefit?
Is there a ceiling dose beyond which semaglutide stops adding benefit? I have a specific reason for asking rather than idle curiosity, and the context is below. Putting the numbers in the first post, because…
NHAVBT 2 14k 2mo
About the Statistics category
Effect sizes, intervals, multiplicity, and the difference between absent and undetected. This post is a community wiki: any member at trust level 3 or above can edit it, and every edit is recorded with its…
SLJMBVCAV+4 8 2.3k 7mo
Sample size intuition for a personal experiment
On the subject in the title: Sample size intuition for a personal experiment Working notes rather than a conclusion. A follow-up question about sample size intuition that I did not know to ask the first time.…
RKHECAHTT 4 62k 18mo
The "under review" status pill and when a moderator applies it
Posting this under the heading it deserves: The "under review" status pill and when a moderator applies it Everything below is what sits behind that. A question about how this site should cite something that…
NLAMDOVRV+96 119 17k 3mo
Measurement error in home scales, with a worked standard deviation — a second dataset
Measurement error in home scales, with a worked standard deviation — a second dataset — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. Posting a small dataset on Measurement error in home…
AKKSA 2 13k 7mo