[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date index][Thread index]
Roger Harbord <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Mon, 02 Jul 2007 14:55:41 +0100
Subject: st: =3D?ISO-8859-1?Q?Re:_Sharps=3DB4s_metareg_vs_Harbord-Steichen=3DB4=
X-Mailer: Mulberry/2.2.1 (Win32)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3Diso-8859-1; format=3Dflowed
X-Barracuda-Bayes: INNOCENT GLOBAL 0.0000 1.0000 -2.0210
X-Barracuda-Virus-Scanned: by HSPH Email Quarantine System at hsph.harvard.=
X-Barracuda-Spam-Status: No, SCORE=3D-0.48 using global scores of TAG_LEVEL=
=3D1000.0 QUARANTINE_LEVEL=3D3.5 KILL_LEVEL=3D7.0 tests=3DSUBJECT_ENCODED_T=
X-Barracuda-Spam-Report: Code version 3.1, rules version 3.1.21592
=09Rule breakdown below
=09 pts rule name description
=09---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------=
=091.54 SUBJECT_ENCODED_TWICE Subject: MIME encoded twice
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by hsphsun2.harvard.edu=
Stephen Sharp's original version of -metareg- saved the estimate of the
between-studies variance tau-squared in the global macro S_2. The regressio=
coefficients and their variance-covariance matrix are available in the
matrices e(b) and e(V).
I^2 doesn't in fact require tau^2 - it only uses the weighted residual sum =
squares, the analogue of Cochran's Q for meta-regression. I^2 is defined fr=
Cochran's Q in Higgins et al. (2003). So it's the same regardless of the
method used to calculate tau^2. Q is calculated from fixed-effect
meta-regression which can be performed by -vwls-. Q is reported by -vwls- a=
the "Goodness-of-fit chi2" and saved as e(chi2_gf).
I haven't implemented ML or "empirical Bayes" estimation of tau-squared in =
update of -metareg- as I believe that REML is preferable (see Thompson &
Sharp 1999). If Tiago knows of recent evidence to the contrary I'd apprecia=
the references. However, if those methods are requested using the original
syntax then the updated -metareg- simply calls the original program, which =
still present within the same ado-file.
Yours (awaiting round 2?),
Higgins JPT, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, Altman DG. Measuring inconsistency in
meta-analyses. BMJ 2003;327:557-560.
Thompson SG, Sharp SJ. Explaining heterogeneity in meta-analysis: A
comparison of methods. Stat Med 1999;18:2693-2708.
Tiago Pereira wrote :
(Roger will probably reply to this message - I hope).
Well, I was wondering if there is a straighforward way to output (or save)
the results of the old metareg (Sharp=B4s metareg) (sbe 23), beucase I am
unable to get either scalars or macros using the return/ereturn commands.
In this respect, how could one obtain the I^2 using an empirical Bayes
estimate of the between-study variance (tau^2) provided by Sharp=B4s
In relation to the new -metareg- (Harbor-Steichen=B4s metareg), it would b=
so nice if we (non-statisticians, medical researchers) could obtain the ml
and empirical Bayes estimates of tau^2, since recent evidence have shown
that these estimates yield more accurate results than either moment or
reml methods, especially for scenarios typical of meta-analyses in
medicine. Hence, their impplementation would be important.
Thx for any help.
* For searches and help try: