The normality assumption on between-study random effects was questionable in a considerable number of Cochrane meta-analyses.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Studies included in a meta-analysis are often heterogeneous. The traditional random-effects models assume their true effects to follow a normal distribution, while it is unclear if this critical assumption is practical. Violations of this between-study normality assumption could lead to problematic meta-analytical conclusions. We aimed to empirically examine if this assumption is valid in published meta-analyses.

Methods

In this cross-sectional study, we collected meta-analyses available in the Cochrane Library with at least 10 studies and with between-study variance estimates > 0. For each extracted meta-analysis, we performed the Shapiro-Wilk (SW) test to quantitatively assess the between-study normality assumption. For binary outcomes, we assessed between-study

SUBMITTER: Liu Z 

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10053115 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature