[R-meta] Choice of MA
||@t@ @end|ng |rom dewey@myzen@co@uk
Sun Mar 19 14:43:50 CET 2023
I suspect opinions will differ here so my comments (in-line) shouls be
taken with a pinch of salt.
On 19/03/2023 10:20, Jorge Teixeira via R-sig-meta-analysis wrote:
> Hi all. I am doing a SRMA in which most outcomes have just 4 or 5 studies.
> One of them has 4 arms (3 with the intervention of interest; 1 with CON).
> 1) Would you combine these 3 groups into one and do a standard MA or would
> you do a multi-level MA? Note: I have access to the database of the study
> with 4 arms.
Usually I would say do an NMA but with so few studies combining the
intervention groups might be fine as long as they ae scientifically
> 2) Side question: would you tend to not report funnel plots or Egger’s
> regression in this case?
I would not draw a funnel plot or do any of the regression tests.
> 3) If I broaden my eligibility criteria and had 2 more studies, would your
> answers differ?
Not more 2 more, no.
> Thank you,
> [[alternative HTML version deleted]]
> R-sig-meta-analysis mailing list @ R-sig-meta-analysis using r-project.org
> To manage your subscription to this mailing list, go to:
More information about the R-sig-meta-analysis