A common model used to synthesize heterogeneous research is the random effects model of meta-analysis.This is simply the weighted average of the effect sizes of a group of studies.
A systematic review answers a defined research question by collecting and summarising all empirical evidence that fits pre-specified eligibility criteria.
A meta-analysis is the use of statistical methods to summarise the results of these studies.
In addition to providing an estimate of the unknown common truth, meta-analysis has the capacity to contrast results from different studies and identify patterns among study results, sources of disagreement among those results, or other interesting relationships that may come to light in the context of multiple studies.
A key benefit of this approach is the aggregation of information leading to a higher statistical power and more robust point estimate than is possible from the measure derived from any individual study.
IPD evidence represents raw data as collected by the study centers.
This distinction has raised the need for different meta-analytic methods when evidence synthesis is desired, and has led to the development of one-stage and two-stage methods.For instance, a meta-analysis may be conducted on several clinical trials of a medical treatment, in an effort to obtain a better understanding of how well the treatment works. In the 1970s, more sophisticated analytical techniques were introduced in educational research, starting with the work of Gene V. The term is a bit grand, but it is precise and apt ... Although this led to him being widely recognized as the modern founder of the method, the methodology behind what he termed "meta-analysis" predates his work by several decades. For reporting guidelines, see the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. from the literature) and typically represents summary estimates such as odds ratios or relative risks.Here it is convenient to follow the terminology used by the Cochrane Collaboration, and use "meta-analysis" to refer to statistical methods of combining evidence, leaving other aspects of 'research synthesis' or 'evidence synthesis', such as combining information from qualitative studies, for the more general context of systematic reviews. The first meta-analysis of all conceptually identical experiments concerning a particular research issue, and conducted by independent researchers, has been identified as the 1940 book-length publication Extrasensory Perception After Sixty Years, authored by Duke University psychologists J. The statistical theory surrounding meta-analysis was greatly advanced by the work of Nambury S. In general, two types of evidence can be distinguished when performing a meta-analysis: individual participant data (IPD), and aggregate data (AD). This can be directly synthesized across conceptually similar studies using several approaches (see below).A meta-analysis is a statistical analysis that combines the results of multiple scientific studies.Meta-analysis can be performed when there are multiple scientific studies addressing the same question, with each individual study reporting measurements that are expected to have some degree of error.It will direct you to useful resources provided by CCACE researchers and external bodies.There is a ‘wiki’ section for you, and others who have been through the process, to add useful hints and tips, and up-to-date resources particularly relevant to researchers and students in CCACE.By reducing IPD to AD, two-stage methods can also be applied when IPD is available; this makes them an appealing choice when performing a meta-analysis.Although it is conventionally believed that one-stage and two-stage methods yield similar results, recent studies have shown that they may occasionally lead to different conclusions.The aim then is to use approaches from statistics to derive a pooled estimate closest to the unknown common truth based on how this error is perceived.Existing methods for meta-analysis yield a weighted average from the results of the individual studies, and what differs is the manner in which these weights are allocated and also the manner in which the uncertainty is computed around the point estimate thus generated.