[R-meta] Calculate individual SDs from ES's SDs

[James Pustejovsky]

No, that's not possible. But why do you need to do this? Couldn't you just
use the ES and VAR directly?

On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 8:53 AM, Cesar Terrer Moreno <cesar.terrer at me.com>
wrote:

> Dear James,
>
>
>
> I believe you are right, 1.38 is the effect size, and 0.07 the error of
> the effect size.
>
>
>
> My question is whether I can compute the standard error of the control and
> treated groups having the effect size’s SE/SD.
>
> ES = 1.38
>
> VAR = 0.07^2
>
>
>
> MeanControl = 1
>
> MeanTreated = 1.38
>
> *SEControl = ?*
>
> *SETreated = ?*
>
>
>
> *De:* James Pustejovsky [mailto:jepusto at gmail.com]
> *Enviado el:* 26 February 2018 15:45
> *Para:* Cesar Terrer Moreno <cesar.terrer at me.com>
> *CC:* r-sig-meta-analysis at r-project.org
> *Asunto:* Re: [R-meta] Calculate individual SDs from ES's SDs
>
>
>
> I would hazard a guess that the +/- 0.07, which is described as "SD",
> might actually be the standard error of the effect size estimate. So in the
> example, ES = 1.38 and sampling variance = 0.07^2 = 0.049. Perhaps you can
> verify this speculation using other information in the source document.
>
>
>
> James
>
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 6:41 AM, Cesar Terrer Moreno <cesar.terrer at me.com>
> wrote:
>
> Dear all,
>
> I have a series of effects sizes, expressed as e.g.:
>
> 1.38 ± 0.07 (MEANexp/MEANcontrol, SD, n=3)
>
> I have to express these experiments as MEANexp, SDexp, MEANcontrol,
> SDcontrol in order to put all data in a correct formar that can be read by
> escalc in metafor.
>
> I guess I can assume MEANexp = 1.38 and MEANcontrol = 1, but how can I
> compute SDs so that escalc computes the effect size’s variance properly?
>
> Thanks
> César
> _______________________________________________
> R-sig-meta-analysis mailing list
> R-sig-meta-analysis at r-project.org
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-sig-meta-analysis
>
>
>

	[[alternative HTML version deleted]]