|
Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
|
Interpreting and Evaluating Meta-Analysis
Judith A. Hall
Northeastern University
Robert Rosenthal
Harvard University
This article offers some guidelines for interpreting and evaluating meta-analytic reviews of research. The fundamental goals of metaanalysis are to combine results across studies to yield an overall estimate of effect and to compare effects between studies in order to understand moderating factors. Suggestions are made for what readers should look for in a meta-analysis, and a discussion is provided of several issues that are not often explicitly addressed: choice of unit of analysis, fixed versus random effects, the meaning of heterogeneity, determination of when contrasts are appropriate, and the choice of measure of central tendency. We recommend that readers adopt a skeptical attitude about the results of meta-analysis, particularly when only complex analyses are reported.
Evaluation & the Health Professions, Vol. 18, No. 4,
393-407 (1995)
DOI: 10.1177/016327879501800404

CiteULike Connotea Del.icio.us Digg Reddit Technorati What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:

|
 |

|
 |
 
A. Meilink, B. Hemmen, H. Seelen, and G. Kwakkel
Impact of EMG-triggered neuromuscular stimulation of the wrist and finger extensors of the paretic hand after stroke: a systematic review of the literature
Clinical Rehabilitation,
April 1, 2008;
22(4):
291 - 305.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
W. J. Horrey and C. D. Wickens
Examining the Impact of Cell Phone Conversations on Driving Using Meta-Analytic Techniques
Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society,
January 1, 2006;
48(1):
196 - 205.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
M. S. Hwang, K. L. Yeagley, and R. Petosa
A Meta-Analysis of Adolescent Psychosocial Smoking Prevention Programs Published Between 1978 and 1997 in the United States
Health Educ Behav,
December 1, 2004;
31(6):
702 - 719.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
N. Ensari, J. B. Kenworthy, L. Urban, C. J. Canales, E. Vasquez, D. Kim, and N. Miller
Negative Affect and Political Sensitivity in Crossed Categorization: Self-Reports versus EMG
Group Processes Intergroup Relations,
January 1, 2004;
7(1):
55 - 75.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
D. L. Roter, J. A. Hall, and Y. Aoki
Physician Gender Effects in Medical Communication: A Meta-analytic Review
JAMA,
August 14, 2002;
288(6):
756 - 764.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|
|
|