[R-meta] Modeling dependent effect sizes (MASEM/TSSEM)
Marius Wuketich
m@riu@wuketich @ending from gm@il@com
Sat Nov 17 15:32:39 CET 2018
Dear colleagues,
I have a question about different approaches to modeling dependent effect
sizes. I'm doing a TSSEM study (based on correlation coefficients)
according to Mike Cheung in metaSEM. My path model is a model with one
independent and one dependent variable and three mediators.
A small part of my work deals with different methods to consider dependent
effect strengths in a MASEM analysis. I would like to compare the results
of the following three methods:
1. simple averaging the effect sizes
2. the approach of Wilson/Polanin/Lipsey 2016 (
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4905597/) - a combination of a
three-level hierarchical model and TSSEM
3. the robust variance estimation according to Tipton/Hedges/Johnson 2010 (
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/jrsm.5) for the first part
of the TSSEM
With the third approach, I now have a basic understanding problem - how do
I have to specify my model in metafor for the robust approach?
K_ID = Study ID
ESID = Effect sizes ID
Second approach (three-level-model):
Step1 <-rma.mv(yi=r, V=N_INV,
data=dataset,
random=list(~1|K_ID,~1|ESID),
method="ML", mods=~factor(Zelle)-1)
summary (Step1)
Third approach (robust variance approach):
Step1 <-rma.mv(yi=r, V=N_INV,
data=Robust1,
random= ~1|K_ID,
method="ML", mods=~factor(Zelle)-1)
summary (Step1)
step2 <- robust(Step1, cluster = Robust1$K_ID, adjust = TRUE)
summary(step2)
######################################################
Is that specified correctly yet? It just seems too simple to me.
Best,
Marius
[[alternative HTML version deleted]]
More information about the R-sig-meta-analysis
mailing list