A basic introduction to fixed-effect and random-effects models for meta-analysis
Top Cited Papers
- 1 April 2010
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wiley in Research Synthesis Methods
- Vol. 1 (2) , 97-111
- https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.12
Abstract
There are two popular statistical models for meta-analysis, the fixed-effect model and the random-effects model. The fact that these two models employ similar sets of formulas to compute statistics, and sometimes yield similar estimates for the various parameters, may lead people to believe that the models are interchangeable. In fact, though, the models represent fundamentally different assumptions about the data. The selection of the appropriate model is important to ensure that the various statistics are estimated correctly. Additionally, and more fundamentally, the model serves to place the analysis in context. It provides a framework for the goals of the analysis as well as for the interpretation of the statistics. In this paper we explain the key assumptions of each model, and then outline the differences between the models. We conclude with a discussion of factors to consider when choosing between the two models. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.Keywords
This publication has 11 references indexed in Scilit:
- Empirical vs natural weighting in random effects meta‐analysisStatistics in Medicine, 2010
- Meta-analytic interval estimation for standardized and unstandardized mean differences.Psychological Methods, 2009
- Meta-analytic interval estimation for bivariate correlations.Psychological Methods, 2008
- Methods of Meta-AnalysisPublished by SAGE Publications ,2004
- The power of statistical tests in meta-analysis.Psychological Methods, 2001
- Fixed- and random-effects models in meta-analysis.Psychological Methods, 1998
- The case for confidence intervals in controlled clinical trialsControlled Clinical Trials, 1994
- Distribution Theory for Glass's Estimator of Effect size and Related EstimatorsJournal of Educational Statistics, 1981
- Development of a general solution to the problem of validity generalization.Journal of Applied Psychology, 1977
- The Proof and Measurement of Association between Two ThingsThe American Journal of Psychology, 1904