This study challenges two core conventional meta-analysis methods: fixed effect and random effects. We show how and explain why an unrestricted weighted least squares estimator is superior to conventional random-effects meta-analysis when there is publication (or small-sample) bias and better than a fixed-effect weighted average if there is heterogeneity. Statistical theory and simulations of effect sizes, log odds ratios and regression coefficients demonstrate that this unrestricted weighted least squares estimator provides satisfactory estimates and confidence intervals that are comparable to random effects when there is no publication (or small-sample) bias and identical to fixed-effect meta-analysis when there is no heterogeneity. When there is publication selection bias, the unrestricted weighted least squares approach dominates random effects; when there is excess heterogeneity, it is clearly superior to fixed-effect meta-analysis. In practical applications, an unrestricted weighted least squares weighted average will often provide superior estimates to both conventional fixed and random effects.
Field of Research
140302 Econometric and Statistical Methods 0104 Statistics 1117 Public Health And Health Services
Socio Economic Objective
919999 Economic Framework not elsewhere classified
Every reasonable effort has been made to ensure that permission has been obtained for items included in DRO. If you believe that your rights have been infringed by this repository, please contact email@example.com.