Notice: On April 23, 2014, Statalist moved from an email list to a forum, based at statalist.org.
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: st: Metan for random effects
From
Aggie Chidlow <[email protected]>
To
[email protected]
Subject
Re: st: Metan for random effects
Date
Sat, 10 Apr 2010 20:20:27 +0100
Dear Henry,
Thank you for the link it is much appreciated.
The information in there ia actually similar to the book I have been
reading titled: Meta-Analysis in Stata, Edited by Sterne in 2009.
I think I understand the mechanics of the metan command. However, I am
having a problem to us is for my or work. So, if you could suggest
anything I would be very thankful.
In my current research I am investigating "if" and "how" researchers
in 4 top journals reported (or not) a particular framework in mail
survey studies between 2000 - 2009. The framework consists of 5 steps.
I coded the steps individually as a dummy variable e.g. Step One (0=
Reported; 1=Not Reported) and I also codded them together (Tables 1
and 2 respectively below). Out of 279 studies with mail survey as a
data collection procedure, 113 report the framework and 166 don't
report it at all.
Table1
First Step | Name of the journal the article appeared
| J1 J2 J3 J4
| Total
---------------+--------------------------------------------+----------
Not Reported | 25 21 17 16 | 79
Reported | 6 8 11 8 | 33
---------------+--------------------------------------------+----------
Total | 31 29 28 24 | 112
Table 2
| Name of the journal the article appeared
All Steps together | J1 J2 J3
J4 | Total
----------------------+--------------------------------------------+----------
Not Mention | 68 41 32
25 | 166
One Step mention | 17 14 17 12
| 60
Two Steps mention | 8 9 8
5 | 30
Three Steps mention | 4 5 2
6 | 17
Four Steps mention | 1 2 1
1 | 5
Five Steps mention | 1 0 0
0 | 1
----------------------+--------------------------------------------+----------
Total | 99 71 60
49 | 279
I know that in order to proceed with "metan" I have to calculate the
effect size.
I also know that there are different effect sizes for continous and
binary data (as stated in the link you suggested). But HOW do I
calculate the effect size (i.e. Odd ratio or risk ratios) for a dummy
variable in Table 1, for example? That's where I get confused?
I would appreciate your advise, if possible.
Many thanks in advance
On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 2:42 PM, Henry <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Aggie,
> Could this link be of help to you?
> http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/medicine/bmj/systreviews/pdfs/chapter18.pdf
> HTH,
> Henry
>
> On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 1:41 PM, Aggie Chidlow
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Hi All,
>>
>>
>> Can somebody advise me how to calculate odd ratios or risk ratios for
>> a meta-analysis with random effects, please? Many thanks in advance.
>> *
>> * For searches and help try:
>> * http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search
>> * http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
>> * http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/
>>
>
> *
> * For searches and help try:
> * http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search
> * http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
> * http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/
>
*
* For searches and help try:
* http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search
* http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
* http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/