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: Meta-Analysis of Proportions
From
David Hoaglin <[email protected]>
To
[email protected]
Subject
Re: st: Meta-Analysis of Proportions
Date
Fri, 11 Oct 2013 07:28:05 -0400
Hi, Jonviea.
At the moment I can offer only some brief comments.
If you are considering a random-effects analysis, be sure to avoid the
DerSimonian-Laird procedure, whose problems of lower than nominal
coverage and potential bias have been described in the literature.
One can avoid those difficulties by using a Bayesian approach, but I
don't know whether anyone has implemented it in Stata.
One useful book, not well enough known, is Kulinskaya et al. (2008).
David Hoaglin
Kulinskaya E, Morgenthaler S, Staudte RG (2008). Meta Analysis. John
Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 5:14 AM, Chamberlain Jonviea Danielle
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm interested in performing a meta-analysis of a proportion/rate (for example, I'd like to come up with an pooled estimate of the case-fatality rate). I recently read that the Freeman-Tukey transformation should be used when using proportions. Is there a preferable way to meta-analyze proportions instead of using this transformation? If yes, what would that be and how would you perform the command in stata? Or, is it ok to not use a transformation? I attempted to use the Freeman-Tukey transformation and compared results with my meta-analysis of the non-transformed proportion and results were quite similar. Also, does anyone have any recommended texts on advanced analysis in stata that also explains the 'why' of why you'd choose one method over another?
*
* For searches and help try:
* http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search
* http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/resources/statalist-faq/
* http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/