The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Evaluating meta-analytic methods to detect selective reporting in the presence of dependent effect sizes.
Open accessPublished version of a preprint
Abstract
Selective reporting of results based on their statistical significance threatens the validity of meta-analytic findings. A variety of techniques for detecting selective reporting, publication bias, or small-study effects are available and are routinely used in research syntheses. Most such techniques are univariate, in that they assume that each study contributes a single, independent effect size estimate to the meta-analysis. In practice, however, studies often contribute multiple, statistically dependent effect size estimates, such as for multiple measures of a common outcome construct. Many methods are available for meta-analyzing dependent effect sizes, but methods for investigating selective reporting while also handling effect size dependencies require further investigation. Using Monte Carlo simulations, we evaluate three available univariate tests for small-study effects or selective reporting, including the trim and fill test, Egger's regression test, and a likelihood ratio test from a three-parameter selection model (3PSM), when dependence is ignored or handled using ad hoc techniques. We also examine two variants of Egger's regression test that incorporate robust variance estimation (RVE) or multilevel meta-analysis (MLMA) to handle dependence. Simulation results demonstrate that ignoring dependence inflates Type I error rates for all univariate tests. Variants of Egger's regression maintain Type I error rates when dependent effect sizes are sampled or handled using RVE or MLMA. The 3PSM likelihood ratio test does not fully control Type I error rates. With the exception of the 3PSM, all methods have limited power to detect selection bias except under strong selection for statistically significant effects. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).
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
“Publication bias was assessed both visually, using funnel plots, and statistically, using a multilevel Egger-type regression test, in which the standard error of the effect size was included as a predictor in a mixed-effects model (39).”
From Carbohydrate ingestion during prolonged exercise and net skeletal muscle glycogen utilization: A meta-analysis. (2026) · cites this paper as [39]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
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
The publisher hasn’t deposited this paper’s reference list.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 401–490 of 490
Bagaïni, A., Liu, Y., Bajrami, A., Son, G., Tisdall, L., & Mata, R. (2022) · doi:10.31234/osf.io/rwqf2
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
Boettiger, S., & Luke, T. J. (2023) · doi:10.31234/osf.io/84fdg
Graf, E., Donath, J. L., Botes, E., Voracek, M., & Goetz, T. (2023) · doi:10.31234/osf.io/38rzt
Hartanto, A., Lua, V. Y. Q., Kasturiratna, K. T. A. S., Koh, P. S., Tng, G. Y. Q., Kaur, M., Quek, F. Y. X., Chia, J. L., & Majeed, N. M. (2024) · Technology Mind and Behavior · doi:10.1037/tmb0000123.supp
“The methodology has been supported as a valid method to detect publication bias (L. Lin et al., 2018; Rodgers & Pustejovsky, 2021).”
Morrison, K., Yang, Y., Ricolfi, L., Williams, C., Lagisz, M., & Nakagawa, S. (2024) · doi:10.32942/x2js6s
Protocol: Abortion and mental health outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysisPreprint
Littell, J. H., Young, S., Pigott, T., Biggs, A., Munk‐Olsen, T., & Steinberg, J. R. (2024) · doi:10.31219/osf.io/nsyju
PROTOCOL: Abortion and mental health outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Littell, J. H., Young, S., Pigott, T., Biggs, M. A., Munk‐Olsen, T., & Steinberg, J. R. (2024) · Campbell Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/cl2.1410 · Cited by 1
“…studies (independent effect sizes) in a funnel plot, we will use statistical tests for asymmetry (e.g., Egger's test) for dependent effect sizes as discussed by Rodgers and Pustejovsky (2021) and an extension to selection models using cluster wild bootstrapping methods (Pustejovsky & Joshi, 2023).”
Child maltreatment and interoception: A meta-analytic reviewPreprint
Ditzer, J., Woll-Weber, C. F. J., Burger, C., Ernst, A., Boehm, I., Garthus‐Niegel, S., & Zietlow, A. (2024) · OSF Preprints (OSF Preprints) · doi:10.31219/osf.io/n8tpc
陈, 俊. (2024) · Advances in Social Sciences · doi:10.12677/ass.2024.139870
Board Independence and Bank Risk-Taking: A Meta-Analysis of the Role of Formal InstitutionsPreprint
Pugachev, L., Spadafore, E., Addo, K. A., & Kumodzie‐Dussey, M. K. (2025) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.5168509
Video game play and well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic: a meta-analysis of global findings
Kaczmarek, L. D., Chwiłkowska, P., Behnke, M., & Drążkowski, D. (2025) · Humanities and Social Sciences Communications · doi:10.1057/s41599-025-05581-6 · Cited by 2
“Publication bias was assessed using funnel plots and the adapted Egger ’ s regression test, adjusted for the dependency of multiple effect sizes per study (Rodgers and Pustejovsky, 2021).”
Lock, S. K., Kappel, D. B., Hutton, J., et al. (2025) · medRxiv · doi:10.1101/2025.09.23.25336442
Brunner, M., Preckel, F., Goetz, T., Lüdtke, O., & Keller, L. (2025) · PsyArXiv (OSF Preprints) · doi:10.31234/osf.io/6pmhr_v2
Cloze test performance and cognitive abilities: A comprehensive meta-analysis
Busse, F., Zimny, L., Schroeders, U., & Wilhelm, O. (2025) · Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.intell.2025.101962 · Cited by 5
Shen, Y., Yi, C. A. I., & Jixia, W. U. (2025) · Advances in Psychological Science · doi:10.3724/sp.j.1042.2025.2121
Li, J., Li, W., Li, X., Zhao, Y., & Yang, C. C. (2025) · Trauma Violence & Abuse · doi:10.1177/15248380251383917
Wei, F. A. N., & CHENG, Y. (2025) · Advances in Psychological Science · doi:10.3724/sp.j.1042.2026.0083
Schäfer, S. K., Burmeister, C. F., Lottermoser, E., Schäfer, C. G., Ortolano, L. C., Stoffers‐Winterling, J., Flasinski, T., Equit, M., Schneider, S., Lieb, K., et al. (2025) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2025-103872
“The potential impact of publication bias will be assessed through visual inspections of contour-enhanced funnel plots, 78 regression-based tests for multilevel meta-analyses 79 and worst-case meta-analyses.”
de Roo, M., Hartman, C. A., Wiertsema, M., & Kretschmer, T. (2025) · International Journal of Obesity · doi:10.1038/s41366-025-01957-5 · Cited by 1
“We included the sampling variance as a moderator in the model to account for dependence among effect sizes [41].”
Kamel, A. M., Sabry, N. A., & Farid, S. (2022) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.21077855
Kamel, A. M., Sabry, N. A., & Farid, S. (2022) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.21077861
Kamel, A. M., Sabry, N. A., & Farid, S. (2022) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.21077864
Does transcription instruction make writing intervention more effective? A meta-analysis
Guo, Y., Mercer, S. H., & Squires, B. (2025) · Journal of School Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.jsp.2025.101502
张, 璐. (2025) · Advances in Psychology · doi:10.12677/ap.2025.1512665
Bourke, M., Harrison, Z., Staton, S., Rossa, K. R., & Smith, S. S. (2026) · Sleep Medicine Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.smrv.2026.102232 · Cited by 4
Lock, S. K., Kappel, D. B., Hutton, J., Simmonds, E., Legge, S. E., O’Donovan, M. C., & Pardiñas, A. F. (2026) · Frontiers in Pharmacology · doi:10.3389/fphar.2025.1719761
“We formally tested for publication bias using an adjusted version of Egger’s Test that accounts for the multi-level nature of the data, also using 1/ √ N in place of the standard error moderator (Rodgers and Pustejovsky, 2021).”
Tang, L., Liu, H., Pang, Y., Wang, G., Wang, Z., & Lv, T. (2026) · Frontiers in Pharmacology · doi:10.3389/fphar.2025.1738172 · Cited by 2
“Publication bias was evaluated using funnel plots, supplemented by Egger’s regression test and trim-and-fill adjustment with a maximum of 10 iterations (Lin and Chu, 2018; Rodgers and Pustejovsky, 2021).”
The Effects of Early Childhood Science Educational Interventions on Children’s Science Achievement
Lynch, K., Asher, C. A., Gotwals, A. W., & Settlage, J. (2026) · The Elementary School Journal · doi:10.1086/739369 · Cited by 1
Haitani, T., Aoki, M., & Iimura, D. (2026) · The Japanese journal of psychology · doi:10.4992/jjpsy.97.24402
Gurauskis, D., & Kasparaitis, A. (2026) · MAPAN · doi:10.1007/s12647-026-00901-w
Mortality salience: A critical synthesis of its effects on psychological symptoms
Letzner, R. D., Nedelcea, C., & Boroi, D. (2026) · Death Studies · doi:10.1080/07481187.2026.2630951
Shen, L., Huang, Y., Ma, Z., Chen, M., Ma, C., & Clemens, N. H. (2026) · School Psychology Review · doi:10.1080/2372966x.2026.2633597 · Cited by 1
Douglas, G. P., Myers, J. A., Mason, K. M., Powell, S. R., & Lariviere, D. O. (2026) · Journal of Learning Disabilities · doi:10.1177/00222194261424914 · Cited by 1
“We assessed publication bias using a modified Egger’s test (Rodgers & Pustejovsky, 2021), the Trim-and-Fill Method (Duval & Tweedie, 2000), and PET-PEESE (Stanley, 2017).”
Meng, X., Chenyuan, H. A. N., Yijing, C. H. E. N., Rudasill, K. M., Bussey, K., & Gao, S. (2026) · Trauma Violence & Abuse · doi:10.1177/15248380261428433
Qin, W., Xu, F., Gu, C., Xiaomeng, Y. A. N. G., Yu, Y., Peng, J., Li, J., & Hu, B. Y. (2026) · Thinking Skills and Creativity · doi:10.1016/j.tsc.2026.102215 · Cited by 1
Meng, X., Hua, L., Rudasill, K. M., Yijing, C. H. E. N., Buzzai, C., & Chen, J. (2026) · Journal of Youth and Adolescence · doi:10.1007/s10964-026-02341-w
“The R code was taken from procedures published by Assink and Wibbelink (2016) and Rodgers and Pustejovsky (2021).”
Semančíková, I., Děchtěrenko, F., Patel, P., & Bezdíček, O. (2026) · Neuropsychology Review · doi:10.1007/s11065-025-09687-1
Sirparanta, A. (2024) · theses.fr (ABES) · doi:10.70675/01e34829zd16az44abz83d6z94398e631330
Durand, A., & Bègue, L. (2026) · Journal of Research in Personality · doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2026.104725
Bourke, M., Sippel, F., & Fortnum, K. (2026) · Journal of Psychiatric Research · doi:10.1016/j.jpsychires.2026.04.033 · Cited by 2
Thuesen, F., Jakobsen, V., Viinholt, B. C. A., Bengtsen, E., & Vembye, M. H. (2026) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.6674518
Rehder, J., Timm, I., Berretz, G., Reinhard, I., Neubauer, A. B., Güntürkün, O., Takano, K., Bierbauer, W., Cabrita, M., Bourke, M., et al. (2026) · Nature Human Behaviour · doi:10.1038/s41562-026-02427-2 · Cited by 4
“We used the precision-effect test and precision-effect estimate with standard errors to apply a small study bias correction by using either the standard error and the effect size variance as regres-sors 158 .”
Stacheder, M., Oppermann, E., & Anders, Y. (2026) · Child Development · doi:10.1093/chidev/aacag090
Road effects on animal populations: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Wang, M., & Wang, Y. (2026) · Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution · doi:10.3389/fevo.2026.1940830 · Cited by 1
Deng, Y., Li, Y., Zhang, Y., Liu, Y., & Wen, J. (2026) · Acta Psychologica · doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2026.107130
Thakur, H., Schäfer, C. G., Kunzler, A. M., Burmeister, C. F., Michael, T., Equit, M., Möhler, E., Lieb, K., & Schäfer, S. K. (2026) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2026-117737
“…examined for the synthesis of intervention effectiveness using visual inspection of contour-enhanced funnel plots, 50 regression-based tests appropriate for multilevel meta-analyses 51 and worst-case meta-analyses to assess the robustness of pooled effect estimates under conservative assumptions.”
Embodied Effects in Verb Processing and Learning: A Three-Level Meta-Analysis
Huang, Y., Zhai, Y., Jiang, Z., et al. (2026) · Behavioral Sciences · doi:10.3390/bs16060914
“Egger’s regression test for multilevel meta-analysis, which examines the relationship between standard error and effect size, was not significant ( p = 0.070), indicating that publication bias is likely minimal (Rodgers & Pustejovsky, 2021).”
InfluentialAttractive Things Do Work Better: A Meta-Analysis on Visual Aesthetics and User Performance
Schlamann, M., Nestler, S., & Thielsch, M. T. (2026) · International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447318.2026.2664081 · Cited by 1
Executive function in adolescents with obesity: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Asgeirsdottir, U. A., Janssen, L., Villringer, A., & Witte, A. V. (2026) · Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2026.106828 · Cited by 1
Childhood Maltreatment and Adult Attachment: A Three-Level Meta-Analytic Review
Li, S., Ma, Y., Cao, X., Liu, J., Qi, Y., & Chen, X. (2026) · Trauma Violence & Abuse · doi:10.1177/15248380261455767
Johansen, S. B., Bentzen, T. Ø., & Christensen, S. L. (2026) · Social Science & Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2026.119555
Hoskins, J. I., Gooch, D., & Gilligan-Lee, K. A. (2026) · Journal of Attention Disorders · doi:10.1177/10870547261459712
“Asymmetry was tested for statistically using Robust Egger’s Regression (Egger et al., 1997), specifically utilising the Precision Effect Estimate with Standard Error (PEESE) and the Precision-Effect Test (PET) to analyse disaggregated dependent effects (Rodgers & Pustejovsky, 2021).”
Waaland, E., Rønneberg, V., & ten Braak, D. (2026) · Educational Psychology Review · doi:10.1007/s10648-026-10184-x
Donolato, E., Caviola, S., Masi, A., Lervåg, A., & Melby‐Lervåg, M. (2026) · Educational Research Review · doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2026.100815 · Cited by 1
Guan, L., Han, L., Zou, Y., Feng, D., Xia, P., Peng, Y., & Fan, Z. (2026) · Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition · doi:10.1080/15502783.2026.2692017
“…were nested within studies, the regression-based test for small-study effects was implemented within a three-level mixed-effects meta-regression framework, with a sample-size-based precision term included as the predictor and random effects specified at the study and effect-size levels [38,39].”
Luxton, T., West, R. M., King, N., Gould, R., Wälti, C., & Sandoe, J. A. T. (2026) · Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy · doi:10.1093/jac/dkag230
Imaginary companions: A meta-analytic investigation on anthropomorphism and chronic loneliness
Durand, A., & Bègue, L. (2026) · Acta Psychologica · doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2026.107436
Han, X., Liu, X., Meng, Y., Feng, Y., & Chen, X. (2026) · Personality and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/j.paid.2026.113994
Ma, T., Masroori, N., & Morawska, A. (2026) · JBI Evidence Synthesis · doi:10.11124/jbies-26-00106
Jayanthi, M., Krowka, S. K., Schumacher, R. F., Morgan, S. B., Newman-Gonchar, R., Schweer‐Collins, M. L., & Gersten, R. M. (2026) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/00346543261462183
Shan, Z., Yang, W., & Wang, P. (2026) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2026.1888190 · Cited by 5
Döding, R., Donath, L., Ehrenbrusthoff, K., Frangi, J., Schlaffke, L., Schmidt, H., Junker, F. B., Owen, P. J., Saueressig, T., Tagliaferri, S. D., et al. (2026) · Journal of Pain · doi:10.1016/j.jpain.2026.106395
Goulet, J., Archambault, I., Maltais, C., Gilbert-Blanchard, O., & Janosz, M. (2026) · Educational Psychology Review · doi:10.1007/s10648-026-10204-w · Cited by 1
“Nevertheless, we used Egger’s regression test incorporating RVE to test for the presence of asymmetry in the funnel plot (Rodgers & Pustejovsky, 2021).”
Sun, J., Xie, S., Li, J., Li, J., & Mu, F. (2026) · Educational Research Review · doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2026.100830 · Cited by 3
Li, S., Tang, J., Tan, S., et al. (2026) · Environmental Technology & Innovation · doi:10.1016/j.eti.2026.105158
A meta-analysis of the relationship between pretend play and children’s executive function
Li, F., & Zhang, H. (2026) · Cognitive Development · doi:10.1016/j.cogdev.2026.101765
Chen, Y., Zhang, B., Zhang, J., Wong, S. H.-S., & Poon, E. T. (2026) · Journal of sport and health science/Journal of Sport and Health Science · doi:10.1016/j.jshs.2026.101168
Li, Y., Chen, X., Shi, J., Jian-yuan, W., Yang, C., Luo, L., & Hu, X. (2026) · Acta Psychologica · doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2026.107715
Dargiewicz, L., Wehrhöfer, S., Ohle-Peters, A., Ludewig, U., Lauermann, F., & McElvany, N. (2026) · Educational Research Review · doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2026.100834
Mariano, M., Devoto, F., & Zapparoli, L. (2026) · Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2026.106917
McCoy, D. C., Kitamura, K., Miąskiewicz, M., Dermody, C. M., & Raikes, A. (2026) · Child Development · doi:10.1093/chidev/aacag163
Arend, M. G., Schlittmeier, S. J., Mertens, A., & Nitsch, V. (2026) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2026.3730643
“Due to a lack of suitable alternatives for the multilevel case [119], publication bias was assessed based on funnel plots of both the average and maximum effects aggregated per study (see Supplemental Material).”
Chen, Z., Yan, Z., Fu, Z., & Huang, H. (2026) · Acta Psychologica · doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2026.107734 · Cited by 1
Predation impacts of free‐roaming animals on terrestrial wildlife species
Wang, X., Gao, Z., Zong, C., et al. (2026) · Conservation Biology · doi:10.1111/cobi.70384
Wang, Q., Zhong, J., Qi, K., Bao, H., Wang, Y., Guo, S., & Chen, A. (2026) · Psychiatry Research · doi:10.1016/j.psychres.2026.117459
Cong, Q., van Geel, M., Zhao, X., & Vedder, P. H. (2026) · Trauma Violence & Abuse · doi:10.1177/15248380261476689
Guidelines for Meta‐Analytic Structural Equation Modeling: Steps, Resources, and Illustrations
Waheed, H., & Lim, W. M. (2026) · Psychology and Marketing · doi:10.1002/mar.70266
Zheng, W., Parkhill, M. R., Mongene, N., & Dimock, C. D. (2026) · Trauma Violence & Abuse · doi:10.1177/15248380261476604
Workplace Interventions to Promote Employees' Pro‐Environmental Behaviour: A Meta‐Analysis
Brack, F., Petrowsky, H. M., Hörisch, J., & Loschelder, D. D. (2026) · Human Resource Management Journal · doi:10.1111/1748-8583.70066
Estimation and inference for step-function selection models in meta-analyses with dependent effects
Pustejovsky, J. E., Citkowicz, M., & Joshi, M. (2026) · Research Synthesis Methods · doi:10.1017/rsm.2026.10117
Self-citationWang, H., Wang, H., Xin, X., & Yi, Z. (2026) · Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition · doi:10.1080/15502783.2026.2718316
“Egger's regression test was conducted for both two‐ and three‐level models; in the three‐level analysis we used the recommended predictor 2√ N (where N is total sample size) [21,22].”
The Impact of Example Exposure on Creative Performance: A Three-Level Meta-Analysis
Zhang, Z.-K., Peng, Y.-J., Xu, X.-B., & Pang, W. (2026) · Thinking Skills and Creativity · doi:10.1016/j.tsc.2026.102374
Moser, M., Barrett, A., Woll-Weber, C. F. J., Fonagy, P., Luyten, P., & Campbell, C. (2026) · Depression and Anxiety · doi:10.1155/da/6172409 · Cited by 1
“Publication bias was examined using the Egger Sandwich and three-parameter selection model (3PSM) likelihood ratio tests, methods particularly suitable for multilevel meta-analytic models [68].”
Valdebenito, S., Mikton, C. R., Speyer, L., Djurdjevic, F., & Farzana, A. (2026) · Journal of Public Health · doi:10.1007/s10389-026-02885-y
Bakermans‐Kranenburg, M. J., Galbally, M., Hawkins, E., & van IJzendoorn, M. H. (2026) · Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry · doi:10.1111/jcpp.70240
García, A. J., Fong, C. J., Harper, K. L., & Peimani, P. (2026) · The Journal of Higher Education · doi:10.1080/00221546.2026.2735777
Protocol: Service Learning Interventions Effectiveness in Tertiary Education: A Systematic Review
Salas, P. A., Hervás-Torres, M., Fernández-Martín, F. D., Marta, P., Arco-Tirado, J. L., & Furco, A. (2026) · Campbell Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1177/18911803261492322
“Additionally, we will use a contour-enhanced funnel plot (Peters et al., 2008) and (modified) Egger’s test (Rodgers & Pustejovsky, 2021).”
Nguyen, T., Hidajat, T. J., Zhou, T., Ma, T., Hoang, A., Poed, S., & Edwards, E. J. (2026) · Educational Psychology Review · doi:10.1007/s10648-026-10218-4
“To gauge the robustness of the pooled association between teachers’ and students’ SEC, we conducted three complementary publication-bias tests that parallel the procedures recommended for multilevel meta-analysis (Rodgers & Pustejovsky, 2021).”
Bae, M., Zheng, P., Puš, K., Yang, C., Verghese, J., & Mahoney, J. R. (2026) · Archives of Gerontology and Geriatrics · doi:10.1016/j.archger.2026.106448
Metadata
- Authors
- Rodgers, M. A., & Pustejovsky, J. E.
- Affiliations
- The University of Texas at Austin (US)
- Venue
- Psychological Methods
- Published
- 2021-04
- Volume
- 26
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 141-160
- ISSN
- 1082-989X (ISSN-L)
- 1939-1463
- OpenAlex
- W3043790905
- Cited by
- 492
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 111 · 2025: 111 · 2024: 95 · 2023: 72 · 2022: 61 · 2021: 34
- FWCI
- 26.68
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by
- Locations
- Psychological Methods (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- MetArXiv (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion)
- MetArXiv (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Psychology Research and Bibliometrics
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Epidemiology
- Keywords
- selective reporting, publication bias, small-study effects, dependent effect sizes, robust variance estimation, multilevel meta-analysis, type I error rate
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