On the subject in the title: Publication bias detection and its low power Working notes rather than a conclusion.
Working notes on publication bias detection rather than a conclusion. I would rather post the reasoning while it can still be corrected than post the answer once I am committed to it.
Everything below is checkable. Where I have taken a figure from somewhere else I have said where; where I have estimated, I have said that too.
The opening post answers the question as asked. The question underneath it is different.
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.
| Topic | Participants | Replies | Views | Activity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Second pass at: A pooled estimate that changed when one trial was added
On the subject in the title: Second pass at: A pooled estimate that changed when one trial was added Working notes rather than a conclusion. Two things I would like separated before anyone answers on pooled…
|
+26 | 30 | 22k | 1mo |
|
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…
|
4 | 15k | 13mo | |
|
What pooling buys you and what it destroys
The question in the title: What pooling buys you and what it destroys I will give what I have already checked below so nobody repeats it. The question about pooling buys that I actually want answered is the…
|
+74 | 83 | 6.6k | 8mo |
|
Coming back to: Prediction intervals and why they are more honest than confidence intervals
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 | |
|
Risk-of-bias tools and the judgement they conceal — does this still hold?
Risk-of-bias tools and the judgement they conceal — does this still hold? — that is the question, and I have not found it answered plainly anywhere I have looked. Asking about Risk-of-bias tools on behalf of…
|
+26 | 30 | 5.8k | 23h |
| Topic | Participants | Replies | Views | Activity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
How to read a phase 2 result without treating it as a phase 3 result
The question in the title: How to read a phase 2 result without treating it as a phase 3 result I will give what I have already checked below so nobody repeats it. Putting the numbers in the first post,…
|
+36 | 40 | 35k | 7mo |
|
Why retatrutide discussion here is more cautious than elsewhere
Why retatrutide discussion here is more cautious than elsewhere I have a specific reason for asking rather than idle curiosity, and the context is below. A question about retatrutide discussion that I think…
|
+7 | 12 | 7.7k | 2mo |
|
Critiquing an observational claim about a class effect
Posting this under the heading it deserves: Critiquing an observational claim about a class effect Everything below is what sits behind that. I was wrong about critiquing an observational claim in a thread…
|
2 | 6.9k | 14mo | |
|
Follow-up: Individual participant data versus aggregate data
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 |
|
[2026 update] Heterogeneity as information rather than as a nuisance
Heterogeneity as information rather than as a nuisance Writing it up because I had to work it out twice and would rather nobody else did. I have seen SURPASS-4 ( Lancet , 2021) cited in support of a claim I…
|
4 | 32k | 11mo |