The DOI matches its Crossref record; 52 of the 52 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A comparison of heterogeneity variance estimators in simulated random‐effects meta‐analyses
Open accessAbstract
Studies combined in a meta‐analysis often have differences in their design and conduct that can lead to heterogeneous results. A random‐effects model accounts for these differences in the underlying study effects, which includes a heterogeneity variance parameter. The DerSimonian‐Laird method is often used to estimate the heterogeneity variance, but simulation studies have found the method can be biased and other methods are available. This paper compares the properties of nine different heterogeneity variance estimators using simulated meta‐analysis data. Simulated scenarios include studies of equal size and of moderate and large differences in size. Results confirm that the DerSimonian‐Laird estimator is negatively biased in scenarios with small studies and in scenarios with a rare binary outcome. Results also show the Paule‐Mandel method has considerable positive bias in meta‐analyses with large differences in study size. We recommend the method of restricted maximum likelihood (REML) to estimate the heterogeneity variance over other methods. However, considering that meta‐analyses of health studies typically contain few studies, the heterogeneity variance estimate should not be used as a reliable gauge for the extent of heterogeneity in a meta‐analysis. The estimated summary effect of the meta‐analysis and its confidence interval derived from the Hartung‐Knapp‐Sidik‐Jonkman method are more robust to changes in the heterogeneity variance estimate and show minimal deviation from the nominal coverage of 95% under most of our simulated scenarios.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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 source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Meta-analysis was conducted using a random-effect model with restricted maximum likelihood, as the estimator of true heterogeneity, which seems to provide us with less biased estimates than other methods.33”
From Psychological interventions for depression and anxiety: a systematic review and meta-analysis of Iranian chronic pain trials. (2020) · cites this paper as [33]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“For random-effects models, many methods are available, and their performance has been shown to differ depending on the characteristics of the meta-analysis (such as the number and size of the included studies113 114).”
From PRISMA 2020 explanation and elaboration: updated guidance and exemplars for reporting systematic reviews (2021) · cites this paper as [114]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“a random-effects model typically cannot adequately estimate heterogeneity with only two effects (Langan et al., 2019)”
From Investigating the replicability of preclinical cancer biology (2021) · cites this paper as Langan et al., 2019
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“This method assumes a t-distribution of the pooled effect rather than a normal distribution, which reduces the chance of obtaining false-positive results (Langan et al., 2019).”
From The state of hiring discrimination: A meta-analysis of (almost) all recent correspondence experiments (2023) · cites this paper as Langan et al., 2019
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Meta-analysis in clinical trials
DerSimonian, R., & Laird, N. (1986) · Controlled Clinical Trials · doi:10.1016/0197-2456(86)90046-2 · Cited by 39,552
Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta‐analysis
Higgins, J. P. T., & Thompson, S. G. (2002) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.1186 · Cited by 36,763
Self-citationConducting Meta-Analyses in R with the metafor Package
Viechtbauer, W. (2010) · Journal of Statistical Software · doi:10.18637/jss.v036.i03 · Cited by 20,464
Self-citationBorenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P. T., & Rothstein, H. R. (2009) · doi:10.1002/9780470743386 · Cited by 14,225
Self-citationBorenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P. T., & Rothstein, H. R. (2021) · doi:10.1002/9781119558378 · Cited by 9,799
Self-citationHunter, J., & Schmidt, F. (2004) · doi:10.4135/9781412985031 · Cited by 3,023
Maximum Likelihood Approaches to Variance Component Estimation and to Related Problems
Harville, D. A. (1977) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.1080/01621459.1977.10480998 · Cited by 2,667
IntHout, J., Ioannidis, J. P., & Borm, G. F. (2014) · BMC Medical Research Methodology · doi:10.1186/1471-2288-14-25 · Cited by 2,419
Random-effects model for meta-analysis of clinical trials: An update
DerSimonian, R., & Kacker, R. (2007) · Contemporary Clinical Trials · doi:10.1016/j.cct.2006.04.004 · Cited by 2,374
Improved tests for a random effects meta‐regression with a single covariate
Knapp, G., & Hartung, J. (2003) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.1482 · Cited by 2,075
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 801–900 of 1,000
Prediction Performance of Earlier Studies for Later Studies in Cochrane Reviews
Amer, F. M. A., & Lin, L. (2025) · Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice · doi:10.1111/jep.70172 · Cited by 1
České normativní skóry Beckovy škály depresivity: metaanalýza
Gottfried, J. (2019) · TESTFÓRUM · doi:10.5817/tf2019-12-12246 · Cited by 1
Almalik, O., Zhan, Z. Z., & van den Heuvel, E. R. (2022) · Biometrical Journal · doi:10.1002/bimj.202100108 · Cited by 1
Methods for individual participant data meta-analysis in prediction research
de Jong, V. M. T. (2020) · doi:10.33540/469 · Cited by 1
De‐la‐Rosa‐Martinez, D., Delaye-Martínez, M. A., Bello‐Chavolla, O. Y., Sicilia-Andrade, A., Juárez-Cruz, I. D., Fermín‐Martínez, C. A., Márquez‐Salinas, A., Guerra, E. C., Fernández‐Chirino, L., Martínez-Gutiérrez, M. I., et al. (2021) · medRxiv · doi:10.1101/2021.10.17.21265123 · Cited by 18
“test was calculated to quantify the heterogeneity of the studies [9].”
MethodSabatés, J., Belleville, S., Castellani, M., Dwolatsky, T., Hampstead, B. M., Lampit, A., Simon, S. S., Anstey, K. J., Goodenough, B., Mancuso, S. G., et al. (2020) · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-39520/v1 · Cited by 1
Remote Viewing: a 1974-2022 systematic review and meta-analysisPreprint
Tressoldi, P. E., & Katz, D. L. (2023) · doi:10.31234/osf.io/r9yw5 · Cited by 1
Baczynski, M., Jasani, B., Castro, C. D., Dani, C., Subhedar, N. V., Chandrasekharan, P. K., Lakshminrusimha, S., McNamara, P. J., Bischoff, A. R., & Jain, A. (2023) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-3006829/v1 · Cited by 1
Tatsioni, A., & Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2024) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-323-99967-0.00212-x · Cited by 1
Gonzalez, J. T., Lolli, L., Veasey, R. C., Rumbold, P. L. S., Betts, J. A., & Stevenson, E. (2024) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-4317405/v1 · Cited by 1
Gonzalez, J. T., Lolli, L., Veasey, R. C., Rumbold, P. L. S., Betts, J. A., Stevenson, E., & Atkinson, G. (2024) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-4317405/v2 · Cited by 2
Antivirals for post-exposure prophylaxis of influenza: a systematic review and network meta-analysisPreprint
Zhao, Y., Gao, Y., Guyatt, G. H., Uyeki, T. M., Liu, P., Liu, M., Shen, Y., Chen, X., Luo, S., Li, X., et al. (2024) · medRxiv · doi:10.1101/2024.05.28.24307995 · Cited by 1
Connor, G., Fuerst, J. G. R., & Hu, M. (2024) · Qeios · doi:10.32388/5oulh0.2 · Cited by 1
Badu‐Peprah, A., Kontor, E. K., Benjamin, A.-G., Kumah, J., Essuman, A. A., Selorm, B., Nurudeen, I., Owusu, B. O., & Jain, N. (2025) · eLife · doi:10.7554/elife.105488.1 · Cited by 1
The Effect of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Mental Health in Low and Middle Income CountriesPreprint
Aksunger, N., Vernot, C., Littman, R., Voors, M., Meriggi, N. F., Abajobir, A. A., Beber, B., Dai, K., Egger, D., Islam, A., et al. (2022) · medRxiv · doi:10.1101/2022.07.29.22278182 · Cited by 1
Lippens, L., Vermeiren, S., & Baert, S. (2023) · European Economic Review · doi:10.1016/j.euroecorev.2022.104315
Bakbergenuly, I., Hoaglin, D. C., & Kulinskaya, E. (2019) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1903.01362
“and Sánchez-Meca [2010], Sánchez-Meca and Maŕın-Mart́ınez [2010] and Lin [2018]) use these values of SMD in their simulations.”
Kulinskaya, E., Hoaglin, D. C., & Bakbergenuly, I. (2020) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2007.05354
“[2018], Langan et al. [2018], Sidik and Jonkman [2007], and Abo-Zaid et al.”
BackgroundInfluentialMeta-analysis in Clinical and Life Science Research
Basavarajaiah, D. M., & Murthy, B. N. (2020) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-981-15-8210-3_9
Comparing the results of replications in software engineering
Santos, A., Vegas, S., Oivo, M., & Juristo, N. (2021) · Empirical Software Engineering · doi:10.1007/s10664-020-09907-7
“18 τ2 can be estimated with different estimation methods, each of which may provide a potentially different estimate [48].”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialDoni, K., Bühn, S., Weise, A., Mann, N., Heß, S., Sönnichsen, A. C., Pieper, D., Thürmann, P., & Mathes, T. (2021) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-445458/v1
Ghosh, P., Tesfaye, W. H., Manandhar, A., Calma, T., Bushell, M., Oguoma, V. M., Kosari, S., McMillan, F., Peterson, G. M., & Thomas, J. (2021) · BMJ Paediatrics Open · doi:10.1136/bmjpo-2021-001132
Electroconvulsive therapy for preventing relapse and recurrence in bipolar disorder
Munkholm, K., Jørgensen, K. J., & Paludan‐Müller, A. S. (2021) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd015172
Electroconvulsive therapy for acute affective episodes in people with bipolar disorder
Munkholm, K., Jørgensen, K. J., & Paludan‐Müller, A. S. (2021) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd014996
Comparison of Estimation Method in Diagnostic Meta-Analysis: An Application in Dentistry
Merve, P., Hayal, B., Pelin, G., & Özer, N. E. (2021) · International Journal of Clinical Biostatistics and Biometrics · doi:10.23937/2469-5831/1510036
“Some of those are DerSimonian-Laird (DL), Restricted Maximum Likelihood (REML), Sidik and Jonkman (SJ), Hedges and Olkin (HO), Maximum Likelihood (ML), and Paule and Mandel (PM) estimation methods (Table 3) [3,9,10,21].”
InfluentialDesequilibrio y ajuste del sector exterior de la economía española
Romero, G. D. L. D. (1984) · Papeles de economía española/Papeles de economía española
ANÁLISE SALIVAR E O DIAGNÓSTICO DE DOENÇAS BUCAIS
Veríssimo, M. H. G., da Matta, A. V. B., Figueiredo, L. L. M., de Deus, L. A. A., de Sobral, M. I. B., Vasconcelos, M. I. B., de Sales, M. L., Marques, S. C. D. S., Benevides, T. T., & de Carvalho, M. M. S. G. (2021) · RECIMA21 - Revista Científica Multidisciplinar · doi:10.47820/recima21.v2i11.867
Riley, R. D., Tierney, J. F., & Stewart, L. A. (2021) · Wiley eBooks · doi:10.1002/9781119333784.refs2
Tocilizumab for reduction of mortality in severe COVID‐19 patients: How should we GRADE it?
Trkulja, V. (2022) · British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology · doi:10.1111/bcp.15283
“While not without certain limitations,(7) the Hartung–Knapp–Sidik–Jonkman (HKSJ) method has been repeatedly shown (under different scenarios) to result in more adequate coverage probability than the standard method.(5,8) Figure 1A recreates meta-analysis (data presented by the authors(1)) on mortality across the 10 RC…”
MethodFu, Z., Liu, L., Chen, J., & Ning, N. (2022) · The American Journal of Emergency Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.ajem.2022.05.003
Bellato, A., Norman, L. J., Idrees, I., Ogawa, C. Y., Waitt, A. E., Zuccolo, P. F., Tye, C., Raduà, J., Groom, M. J., & Shephard, E. (2021) · doi:10.31219/osf.io/t2kus
Tressoldi, P. E., & Storm, L. (2020) · F1000Research · doi:10.12688/f1000research.24868.2
Veroniki, A. A., Tsokani, S., White, I. R., Schwarzer, G., Rücker, G., Mavridis, D., Higgins, J. P. T., & Salanti, G. (2021) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-403088/v1
Self-citationSabatés, J., Belleville, S., Castellani, M., Dwolatsky, T., Hampstead, B. M., Lampit, A., Simon, S. S., Anstey, K. J., Goodenough, B., Mancuso, S. G., et al. (2020) · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-39520/v2
Geense, W. W., Zegers, M., van den Boogaard, M., & Hannink, G. (2020) · Critical Care Medicine · doi:10.1097/ccm.0000000000004195
Selecting an Augmented Random Effects Model
Rukhin, A. L. (2020) · Mathematical Methods of Statistics · doi:10.3103/s1066530720040043
Felsch, M., Beckmann, L., Bender, R., Kuß, O., Skipka, G., & Mathes, T. (2022) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-1712108/v1
Yıldırım, D. D., ÖZERTÜRK, S., & Sucu, D. H. (2022) · Turkiye Klinikleri Journal of Biostatistics · doi:10.5336/biostatic.2022-90130
Do jihadist terrorist attacks cause changes in institutional trust? A multi-site natural experimentPreprint
Nägel, C., Nivette, A. E., & Czymara, C. S. (2022) · doi:10.31235/osf.io/rgfbd
Bilkish, U. S., Apsara, S., Afruz, M., Choudhury, N., Choudhury, J. Y., Begum, R., & Akhtar, H. (2022) · Scholars Journal of Applied Medical Sciences · doi:10.36347/sjams.2022.v10i10.025
Reply to Kuitunen I (2022). More robust methods are warranted
Kivelä, J. M. (2022) · European Journal of Pediatrics · doi:10.1007/s00431-022-04667-6
(2022) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/pspp0000444.supp
A multilevel meta-analysis on effects of psychological interventions for adults who stutterPreprint
Haitani, T. (2022) · PsyArXiv (OSF Preprints) · doi:10.31234/osf.io/5kc62
Wu, H., Pan, Y., Wang, Z., & Wang, F. (2023) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.23.00358
CADTH (2023) · Canadian Journal of Health Technologies · doi:10.51731/cjht.2023.610
Multiversal Methods and ApplicationsPreprint
Cantone, G. G., & Tomaselli, V. (2023) · doi:10.31222/osf.io/ukvw7
Adaptation of CERES plot to meta-regression
Avcı, E. (2023) · Journal of Statistical Computation and Simulation · doi:10.1080/00949655.2023.2250890
“The estimation problem is summarized by Veroniki et al. [8], Langan et al. [9], and Veroniki et al. [10].”
Low‑to‑moderate hyperoxia in animal models: is there evidence for harm?
Lilien, T. A., & Reinout, A. (2023) · Intensive Care Medicine Experimental · doi:10.1186/s40635-023-00540-4
“Second, we feel that the authors did not sufficiently address the tendency of random-effects models to overestimate the pooled effect estimate, especially if the number of studies is small [3].”
BackgroundLearning from comics versus non-comics material in education: Systematic review and meta-analysisPreprint
Pagkratidou, M., Cohn, N., Phylactou, P., Παπαδάτου-Παστού, Μ., & Duffy, G. (2023) · MetArXiv (OSF Preprints) · doi:10.31222/osf.io/ceda3 · Cited by 1
van der Sluys, M.-E. (2023) · doi:10.5463/thesis.462
Meta-analysis with Jeffreys priors: Empirical frequentist propertiesPreprint
Mathur, M. B. (2024) · doi:10.31219/osf.io/7jvrw
Escobar‐Domingo, M. J., Bustos, V. P., Fanning, J. E., Foppiani, J., Kim, E., Alvarez, A. H., Lin, S., Singhal, D., & Lee, B. T. (2024) · Lymphology · doi:10.2458/lymph.6064
Azarbad, H., & Junker, R. R. (2024) · bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · doi:10.1101/2024.04.30.591815
Tressoldi, P. E., & Storm, L. (2024) · F1000Research · doi:10.12688/f1000research.51746.4 · Cited by 1
Li, H., Jiang, G., Mao, M., Yu, W., Luo, J., Li, S., Xie, L., Bai, X., Xu, Y., Jiang, Y., et al. (2024) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4845175
Cho, H. S., & Hong, J. H. (2024) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-981-97-1773-6_1
Kaushik, A., Kim, C. H., Hofmann, S., Janeiro, M. J., Lloyd, A. R., & Aragão, F. (2024) · Value in Health · doi:10.1016/j.jval.2024.06.002
Brunner, M., Stallasch, S. E., Artelt, C., & Lüdtke, O. (2024) · doi:10.31234/osf.io/dkw42
Siwakoti, A., Khadka, S., Grimshaw, A. A., & Giri, S. (2024) · Clinical Lymphoma Myeloma & Leukemia · doi:10.1016/j.clml.2024.07.008
A new estimator of between study variance of standardized mean difference in meta-analysis
Albayyat, R. H., Aljohani, H. S., & Alnagar, D. K. (2024) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0308628
Orrin, M., Barber, E., & Grainge, M. J. (2024) · BJOG An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology · doi:10.1111/1471-0528.18043 · Cited by 1
Rao, A. P., Khatib, M. N., Thangavelu, L. P., Roopashree, R., Sharma, P., Lal, M., Barwl, A., Prasad, G. V. S., Rajput, P., Zahiruddin, Q. S., et al. (2024) · Asia Pacific Journal of Public Health · doi:10.1177/10105395241305671
Scott, A. J., Kennedy, E. B., & Gholami, S. (2025) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco-24-02435
Badu‐Peprah, A., Kontor, E. K., Benjamin, A.-G., Kumah, J., Essuman, A. A., Selorm, B., Nurudeen, I., Owusu, B. O., & Jain, N. (2025) · medRxiv · doi:10.1101/2025.01.03.25319952
Bayesian Hierarchical Modeling for Variance Estimation in Biopharmaceutical Processes
Schach, S., Eilert, T., Presser, B., & Kunzelmann, M. (2025) · Bioengineering · doi:10.3390/bioengineering12020193
“Langan et al. [10,11] and Veroniki et al. [12] provided a comprehensive review of these meth-ods.”
Meta-analysis with Jeffreys priors: Empirical frequentist properties
Mathur, M. B. (2025) · Research Synthesis Methods · doi:10.1017/rsm.2024.2
“20 In general, Bayesian estimation proceeds by specifying a prior on the unknown parameters and obtaining the posterior of those parameters, given the observed data.”
InfluentialAhmed, S., Ahmad, E., Ahmed, M., Ain, H. U., Ahmed, R., Jain, H., Harikrishna, A., Ashraf, D. A., & Ahmad, S. (2025) · Medicine · doi:10.1097/md.0000000000042113
“It must be noted that restricted maximum likelihood requires a sufficient number of studies to determine accurate variances, [33] which can be a source of limitation in our analysis as the number of included studies is 5.”
Robust inference for the unification of confidence intervals in meta-analysis
Liang, W., Huang, H., Dai, H., & Wei, Y. (2025) · Journal of nonparametric statistics · doi:10.1080/10485252.2025.2492254
“…also be estimated by the (profile) maximum likelihood method (Brockwell and Gordon, 2001; Hardy and Thompson, 1996; Partlett and Riley, 2017; Langan and others , 2019), DerSimonian and Laird’s method of moments (DerSimonian and Laird, 1986) or quantile approximation (Brockwell and Gordon, 2007).”
A Meta-Analysis of Music Emotion Recognition StudiesPreprint
Eerola, T., & Anderson, C. J. (2025) · PsyArXiv (OSF Preprints) · doi:10.31234/osf.io/5azc9_v1
Nakajima, M., Iwata, M., & Terasawa, T. (2025) · Medicine Case Reports and Study Protocols · doi:10.1097/md9.0000000000000362
Badu‐Peprah, A., Kontor, E. K., Benjamin, A.-G., Kumah, J., Essuman, A. A., Selorm, B., Nurudeen, I., Owusu, B. O., & Jain, N. (2025) · eLife · doi:10.7554/elife.105488
Bushi, G., Gaidhane, A. M., Vadia, N., Menon, S. V., Chennakesavulu, K., Panigrahi, R., Shabil, M., Jena, D., Kumar, H., Rani, A., et al. (2025) · Health Science Reports · doi:10.1002/hsr2.70882
Taraldsen, I. A., Lukoschewitz, J. D., Tonning, S. H., Hove, J. D., Jakobsen, J. C., & Grand, J. (2025) · Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica · doi:10.1111/aas.70088
“We will use the restricted maximum likelihood method to estimate the heterogeneity variance [31, 32].”
Reimann, P., Schneider, E.-M., Djanani, A. M., Mink, S., Winder, T. L., & Benda, M. A. (2025) · The Oncologist · doi:10.1093/oncolo/oyaf224
Botulinum toxin for provoked vestibulodynia
Kim, S., Paliakkara, J., Schmutz, J., & Watanabe, N. (2025) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd016202
Interventions for replacing missing teeth: prostheses for the edentulous mandible
Jawad, S., Lewis, S. R., Walsh, T., Boyers, D., Riley, P., & Addison, O. (2025) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd016215
Liu, Q., Yang, J., Lin, M., Liu, Y., Zhu, M., Li, L., Yan, X., Zhang, H., Fu, Y., Zhang, Q., et al. (2025) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2025-106046
“39 The initial network structure will include: acupuncture (as a single node unless substantial heterogeneity suggests otherwise), while each SA technique will be represented as a distinct node based on predefined operational and mechanistic criteria, and waiting-list/no- treat-ment controls as a…”
El‐Sheikh, M., Sillassen, C. D. B., Wisborg, F. D., Hove, J. D., Dirksen, C., Lee, M. M. Y., Jakobsen, J. C., & Grand, J. (2025) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2025-103668 · Cited by 1
“85 86 We will only conclude that heterogeneity is high if the between-trial variance translates into clinically meaningful differences for patients based on effect sizes defined in the trial sequential analyses (see below).”
Saracco, M., Ciriello, V., LEVITA, D. M., Scarpa, S., Bernasconi, A., Balato, G., Maccauro, G., Mariconda, M., & Smeraglia, F. (2025) · Orthopedic Reviews · doi:10.52965/001c.144004
Gupta, S., Basu, S., & Banerjee, R. (2024) · The Evidence · doi:10.61505/evidence.2024.2.2.71
The Utility of Shear Wave Elastography in Hashimoto Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Dragota, R. S., Popescu, M., Rogoveanu, I., Turcu-Ştiolică, A., Ungureanu, B. S., & Ciurea, T. (2025) · Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology · doi:10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2025.09.020
Methodological considerations for recurrence analysis
Wang, B., Kong, Q., Li, Y., & Li, Y. (2025) · Endoscopy · doi:10.1055/a-2669-8182
Zylva, R. D., Wilson, C. J., & Ward, P. (2025) · Journal of Health Psychology · doi:10.1177/13591053251371955
“The HKJS method is considered preferable for analyses in which low numbers of studies and considerable heterogeneity are expected (Cornell et al., 2014; Langan et al., 2019).”
Kılıç, N., & Kayılı, G. (2025) · Participatory Educational Research · doi:10.17275/per.25.88.12.6
“Additionally, the Knapp-Hartung adjustments (Knapp & Hartung, 2003) method was used to calculate the confidence interval around the pooled effect size, as it reduces the likelihood of false positives, particularly in studies with small populations (Langan et al., 2019).”
Avcı, E. (2025) · Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics · doi:10.1080/10543406.2025.2575941
“…(DerSimonian and Laird 1986) is the most widely used meta-analysis approach, boasting over 30,000 citations according to Google Scholar, alternative methods such as restricted maximum likelihood (REML) have demonstrated superior performance in estimation (Cornell et al. 2014; Langan et al. 2019).”
A systematic review and meta-analysis of Old-World bluestem control in the United States
Humphries, T., Lortie, C. J., & Lucero, J. E. (2025) · Rangelands · doi:10.1016/j.rala.2025.10.002
Sillassen, C. D. B., Faltermeier, P., Petersen, J. J., Kamp, C. B., Grand, J., Domínguez, H., Frølich, A., Gæde, P., Gluud, C. N., Mathiesen, O., et al. (2025) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2024-098205
Abbing, A., Koretsi, V., Eliades, T., & Papageorgiou, S. N. (2020) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.13049149
Snell, K. I. E., Allotey, J., Smuk, M., Hooper, R., Chan, C., Ahmed, A., Chappell, L. C., Von Dadelszen, P., Green, M., Kenny, L. C., et al. (2020) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.13175531
Stadelmaier, J., Roux, I., Petropoulou, M., & Schwingshackl, L. (2022) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.21310965
Korang, S. K., Juul, S., Nielsen, E. E., Feinberg, J. B., Siddiqui, F., Ong, G., Klingenberg, S., Veroniki, A. A., Bu, F., Thabane, L., et al. (2020) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.13269804
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Langan, D., Higgins, J. P. T., Jackson, D., Bowden, J., Veroniki, A. A., Kontopantelis, E., Viechtbauer, W., & Simmonds, M.
- Affiliations
- University of Manchester (GB)
- University of Bristol (GB)
- AstraZeneca (United Kingdom) (GB)
- St. Michael's Hospital (CA)
- Maastricht University (NL)
- University of York (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Langan, Dean
- ORCID
- Venue
- Research Synthesis Methods
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2018-09-06
- Volume
- 10
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 83-98
- ISSN
- 1759-2879 (ISSN-L)
- 1759-2887
- OpenAlex
- W2885675882
- Semantic Scholar
- 264ababb39dc4b8737425a30c9fb75c5d8eb2bf4
- Cited by
- 1,074
- References
- 51
- Citations by year
- 2026: 214 · 2025: 173 · 2024: 198 · 2023: 144 · 2022: 140 · 2021: 113 · 2020: 60 · 2019: 28 · 2018: 2
- FWCI
- 38.65
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Research Synthesis Methods (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Research Publications (Maastricht University) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
- Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
- White Rose Research Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York) (submittedVersion)
- Bristol Research (University of Bristol) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
- Research Publications (Maastricht University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Funders
- National Institute for Health and Care Research (NF-SI-0617-10145)
- Medical Research Council (MC_UU_00011/2, MR/K006665/1)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Epidemiology
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
- Keywords
- random-effects meta-analysis, estimation bias, binary outcomes, confidence interval coverage
- MeSH terms
- Systematic Reviews as Topic, Algorithms, Analysis of Variance, Computer Simulation, Data Interpretation, Statistical, Humans, Probability, Research Design, Software, Meta-Analysis as Topic, Reproducibility of Results, Models, Statistical, Selection Bias, Likelihood Functions, Odds Ratio
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
