[R-meta] A rather general question study/effect size ratio

Michael Dewey ||@t@ @end|ng |rom dewey@myzen@co@uk
Fri Feb 4 18:19:47 CET 2022

Dear Farzad

If having more studies means that the treatment has been tried in a 
wider range of settings then my vote is for more studies rather than 
more effects per study. If the settings are homogeneous but the outcomes 
are varied then more outcomes might improve generalisability.


On 04/02/2022 16:50, Farzad Keyhan wrote:
> Hello All,
> All else equal, would it be more desirable to have (A) 40 studies each
> with two estimates of effect size or (B) 20 studies each with 4
> estimates of effect size?
> My intuition is that (A) is more desirable than (B).
> Would it also be more desirable to have (C) 80 studies each with 1
> estimate of effect size over (A) and (B)?
> ps. By "desirable" I mean higher generalizability to the target population.
> Thank you,
> Fred
> _______________________________________________
> R-sig-meta-analysis mailing list
> R-sig-meta-analysis using r-project.org
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-sig-meta-analysis


More information about the R-sig-meta-analysis mailing list