[R-meta] Mean and SD or unstandardized regression coefficients?

[Michael Dewey]

Dear Stefanou

I suspect there may be different opinions here but it seems to me that 
the advantage of the regression coefficients is that they provide a 
better estimate of the effect but their disadvantage is that if primary 
studies adjusted for different variables they are not estimating the 
same thing. So depending on what they adjusted for I might choose either 
of them under different circumstances.

Michael

On 21/11/2021 16:21, Stefanou Revesz wrote:
> Dear Meta-Analysis Experts,
> 
> My sample of longitudinal studies both provide the raw descriptive
> statistics (mean, sd) for groups at different time points as well as
> the unstandardized regression coefficients for group*time interactions
> often adjusted for various confounding variables which may not be the
> same across the studies.
> 
> To meta-analyze these studies, is it better to meta-analyze the
> adjusted unstandardized regression coefficients for group*time
> interactions or the raw (i.e., unadjusted) descriptive statistics
> (mean, sd) for groups at different time points?
> 
> Thanks,
> Stefanou
> 
> _______________________________________________
> R-sig-meta-analysis mailing list
> R-sig-meta-analysis using r-project.org
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-sig-meta-analysis
> 

-- 
Michael
http://www.dewey.myzen.co.uk/home.html