[R-meta] rma.mv-When a higher level can't be modeled because of one row

[Viechtbauer, Wolfgang (SP)]

No, I meant using "~ 1 | study/measure/outcome" or "~ 1 | study/outcome/measure".

Best,
Wolfgang

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Farzad Keyhan [mailto:f.keyhaniha using gmail.com]
>Sent: Monday, 08 November, 2021 16:22
>To: Viechtbauer, Wolfgang (SP)
>Cc: R meta
>Subject: Re: rma.mv-When a higher level can't be modeled because of one row
>
>Thanks Wolfgang.
>
>Yes, this is just the data structure. Focusing on the "making
>[measure] nested within study" part of your suggestion, you mean in
>row # 3, I recode the "measure" value of 1 to 2, or even delete row #
>3 altogether, or "~1 | measure/study/outcome" by default will take
>care of making "measure" nested in study?
>
>Thank you,
>Fred
>
>On Mon, Nov 8, 2021 at 4:13 AM Viechtbauer, Wolfgang (SP)
><wolfgang.viechtbauer using maastrichtuniversity.nl> wrote:
>>
>> Dear Fred,
>>
>> I would consider using measure as a fixed effect or making it nested within
>study (or within outcome). But none of this might really be appropriate for a
>dataset this small (but I assume this was just constructed for illustrating your
>question).
>>
>> Best,
>> Wolfgang
>>
>> >-----Original Message-----
>> >From: Farzad Keyhan [mailto:f.keyhaniha using gmail.com]
>> >Sent: Friday, 05 November, 2021 2:59
>> >To: R meta
>> >Cc: Viechtbauer, Wolfgang (SP)
>> >Subject: Re: rma.mv-When a higher level can't be modeled because of one row
>> >
>> >For clarity, by a solution, I mean how can I account for the
>> >heterogeneity in true effects attributable to "measure", while
>> >"measure" is neither a perfect candidate for being the nestor of
>> >study:
>> >
>> >random = ~1 | measure/study/outcome
>> >
>> >nor a perfect candidate for being crossed with study:
>> >
>> >random = list(~1 | study/outcome, ~1|measure)
>> >
>> >Thank you,
>> >Fred
>> >
>> >On Thu, Nov 4, 2021 at 2:26 PM Farzad Keyhan <f.keyhaniha using gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Dear Experts,
>> >>
>> >> In my toy data below, if in row # 3, "measure" was 2 (instead of 1),
>> >> then, I could take "measure" as a level higher than study:
>> >>
>> >> random = ~1 | measure/study/outcome
>> >>
>> >> But right now, because in study 2 (rows # 3 and 4) "measure" can vary,
>> >> "measure" can't be considered a level higher than study.
>> >>
>> >> On the other hand, because "measure" varies only in one study, I can't
>> >> take "measure" as a crossed random-effect either.
>> >>
>> >> I was wondering what solutions the expert list members might have for
>> >> this situation?
>> >>
>> >> Thanks,
>> >> Fred
>> >>
>> >>    measure       row   study   outcome
>> >>    1             1     1       1
>> >>    1             2     1       2
>> >> #  1             3     2       1 <--- measure on this row
>> >>    2             4     2       1
>> >>    1             5     3       1
>> >>    1             6     3       2