[R-meta] min sample size for three random variables in meta-analysis
Jose Valdebenito
j@v@|deben|to@ch @end|ng |rom gm@||@com
Thu Jul 21 16:42:45 CEST 2022
Hi,
I am conducting a (multi-level) meta-analysis with some sample sizes that
are a bit small.
I was wondering if there is a kind of rule of thumb regarding minimum
sample size number, and the maximum number of random variables I can add to
the models.
I would like to add 3 (as suggested in Cinar et al. Methods Ecol Evol.
2022;13:383–95), but I am afraid that might incur in overparameterization
if I have, say k=10?
These are the random variables:
-Phylogenetic relatedness
-Study ID
-Species ID
Also, would it be any different in a meta-regression?
Here I paste the model and dataset so you can see:
m2 <- rma.mv(L_d, L_v,
data = df,
random = list(~1|species_2,
~1|study.ID,
~1|spp),
R = list(species_2 = vcv), digits = 3)
> head(df, 10)
species_2 spp
study.ID L_d L_v
Grus_americana Grus_americana
p.b.4 0.000 0.135
Loxia_leucoptera Loxia_leucoptera
p.b.15 1.057 0.068
Centrocercus_urophasianus Centrocercus_urophasianus p.b.60
0.384 0.021
Pica_nuttalli Pica_nuttalli
p.b.8 -2.042 0.037
Acrocephalus_paludicola Acrocephalus_paludicola 17
0.000 0.068
Acrocephalus_paludicola Acrocephalus_paludicola 17
-4.978 0.334
Lepidothrix_coronata Lepidothrix_coronata 20
-2.043 0.088
Erithacus_rubecula Erithacus_rubecula 35
-1.723 0.401
Fringilla_coelebs Fringilla_coelebs
35 -2.697 0.111
Parus_caeruleus Parus_caeruleus 35
4.862 0.559
Thanks in advance,
Joe
[[alternative HTML version deleted]]
More information about the R-sig-meta-analysis
mailing list