[R-meta] pooled vs separate QB statistics

[Michael Dewey]

Dear Filippo

Does 
https://www.metafor-project.org/doku.php/tips:different_tau2_across_subgroups 
help?

Michael

On 28/05/2024 11:09, Filippo Gambarota via R-sig-meta-analysis wrote:
> Hi,
> I was reading the two papers (at the end) about categorical moderators
> and the omnibus test and despite the conclusion is that the Q (or F)
> test based on the pooled tau2 estimation works better in most cases,
> when k in each moderator level is large and tau2 is expected to differ
> across levels, it is better to use the non-pooled method.
> 
> Reading the metafor documentation it is not clear to me how to
> implement the non-pooled method. Maybe I am missing something but I
> can change the type of test (z vs t vs knha that takes into account
> tau2 uncertainty) but I see no option to choose the pooled vs non
> pooled tau2 method.
> 
> Thanks
> Filippo
> 
> Rubio-Aparicio, M., López-López, J. A., Viechtbauer, W.,
> Marín-Martínez, F., Botella, J., & Sánchez-Meca, J. (2020). Testing
> Categorical Moderators in Mixed-Effects Meta-analysis in the Presence
> of Heteroscedasticity. Journal of Experimental Education, 88(2),
> 288–310. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220973.2018.1561404
> 
> Rubio-Aparicio, M., Sánchez-Meca, J., López-López, J. A., Botella, J.,
> & Marín-Martínez, F. (2017). Analysis of categorical moderators in
> mixed-effects meta-analysis: Consequences of using pooled versus
> separate estimates of the residual between-studies variances. The
> British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 70(3),
> 439–456. https://doi.org/10.1111/bmsp.12092
> 

-- 
Michael