Random‐Effects Model
Abstract
This chapter contains sections titled: Introduction The true effect sizes Impact of sampling error Performing a random-effects meta-analysis Summary points
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The random effects model permits the generalisation of the corrected effect size estimate to the broader population.
“The random effects model assumes that the true effect size varies from one study to the next, and therefore permits the generalisation of the corrected effect size estimate to the broader population (Borenstein et al., 2009).”
From Intervention Programs Targeting the Mental Health, Professional Burnout, and/or Wellbeing of School Teachers: Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses (2023) · cites this paper as Borenstein et al., 2009
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Becasen, J. S., Denard, C. L., Mullins, M. M., Higa, D. H., & Sipe, T. A. (2019) · American Journal of Public Health · doi:10.2105/ajph.2018.304727 · Cited by 590 · see citing works
Morres, I. D., Hatzigeorgiadis, A., Stathi, A., Comoutos, N., Arpin-Cribbie, C., Krommidas, C., & Theodorakis, Y. (2019) · Depression and Anxiety · doi:10.1002/da.22842 · Cited by 350 · see citing works
Dauwan, M., Begemann, M. J. H., Slot, M. I. E., Lee, E. H. M., Scheltens, P., & Sommer, I. E. C. (2021) · Journal of Neurology · doi:10.1007/s00415-019-09493-9 · Cited by 239 · see citing works
Marsh, H. W., Bornmann, L., Mutz, R., Daniel, H.-D., & O’Mara, A. (2009) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/0034654309334143 · Cited by 174 · see citing works
Liyana Amin, N. A., Tam, W. W. S., & Shorey, S. (2018) · International Journal of Nursing Studies · doi:10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2018.03.021 · Cited by 167 · see citing works
Beames, J. R., Spanos, S., Roberts, A., McGillivray, L., Li, S., Newby, J. M., O’Dea, B., & Werner-Seidler, A. (2023) · Educational Psychology Review · doi:10.1007/s10648-023-09720-w · Cited by 109 · see citing works
Kim, M.-R., Kim, A.-S., Choi, H.-I., Jung, J.-H., Park, J. Y., & Ko, H.-J. (2020) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0236445 · Cited by 76 · see citing works
- Authors
- Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P. T., & Rothstein, H. R.
- Affiliations
- Biostat (United States) (US)
- Northwestern University (US)
- Baruch College (US)
- Venue
- Introduction to Meta‐Analysis
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2009-03-11
- Pages
- 69-75
- OpenAlex
- W1581597362
- Cited by
- 85
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 3
- Type
- other
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Epidemiology
- Keywords
- random effects models, meta-analysis, sampling error, study heterogeneity
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
