How does the DerSimonian and Laird procedure for random effects meta-analysis compare with its more efficient but harder to compute counterparts?
- 1 April 2010
- journal article
- Published by Elsevier in Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference
- Vol. 140 (4) , 961-970
- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jspi.2009.09.017
Abstract
No abstract availableThis publication has 24 references indexed in Scilit:
- A re‐evaluation of the ‘quantile approximation method’ for random effects meta‐analysisStatistics in Medicine, 2008
- The exact distribution of Cochran's heterogeneity statistic in one‐way random effects meta‐analysisStatistics in Medicine, 2008
- A Re-Evaluation of Random-Effects Meta-AnalysisJournal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A: Statistics in Society, 2008
- A simple method for inference on an overall effect in meta‐analysisStatistics in Medicine, 2007
- Some general points in estimating heterogeneity variance with the DerSimonian-Laird estimatorBiostatistics, 2002
- Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta‐analysisStatistics in Medicine, 2002
- Publication Bias and Meta-Analysis for 2×2 Tables: An Average Markov Chain Monte Carlo EM AlgorithmJournal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B: Statistical Methodology, 2002
- Nonparametric estimation of heterogeneity variance for the standardised difference used in meta-analysisBiometrika, 2000
- Meta-analysis in clinical trialsControlled Clinical Trials, 1986
- Minimum Variance Estimation Without Regularity AssumptionsThe Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 1951