[R-meta] Sample size and continuity correction

[Röver, Christian]

Dear all,

just a brief remark -- I think the issue of overlapping / non-
overlapping CIs is closely related to issues of discussing I-squared
values, because you are essentially relating CI widths to differences
between estimates.  The cases of great overlap should be those where
also I^2 is small, and vice versa.  The conclusions you can possibly
draw from looking at mere overlaps should hence have the same
limitations as considerations of I^2 values.  See e.g. the discussions
by Ruecker et al. (2008; https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-8-79) and
Borenstein et al (2017; https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1230).

Cheers,

Christian


On Thu, 2020-08-27 at 21:40 +0000, James Meyer wrote:
> Dear Gerta,
> 
> In relation to the Cis overlapping. I have a diagnostic test accuracy
> meta-analysis with the primary studies using small sample sizes.
> Therefore the confidence intervals for sensitivity and specificity
> are wide and all 10 studies overlap.   This within study variability
> seems to mask any between study heterogeneity.  Is it possible that a
> lack of precision in primary studies can make it look like the meta-
> analysis has low heterogeneity?
> 
> James Meyer DVM MSc
> 
> Sent from Mail<https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for
> Windows 10
> 
> 
> 	[[alternative HTML version deleted]]
> 
> _______________________________________________
> R-sig-meta-analysis mailing list
> R-sig-meta-analysis using r-project.org
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-sig-meta-analysis