The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Mean Difference, Standardized Mean Difference (SMD), and Their Use in Meta-Analysis: As Simple as It Gets
Open accessAbstract
In randomized controlled trials (RCTs), endpoint scores, or change scores representing the difference between endpoint and baseline, are values of interest. These values are compared between experimental and control groups, yielding a mean difference between the experimental and control groups for each outcome that is compared. When the mean difference values for a specified outcome, obtained from different RCTs, are all in the same unit (such as when they were all obtained using the same rating instrument), they can be pooled in meta-analysis to yield a summary estimate that is also known as a mean difference (MD). Because pooling of the mean difference from individual RCTs is done after weighting the values for precision, this pooled MD is also known as the weighted mean difference (WMD). Sometimes, different studies use different rating instruments to measure the same outcome; that is, the units of measurement for the outcome of interest are different across studies. In such cases, the mean differences from the different RCTs cannot be pooled. However, these mean differences can be divided by their respective standard deviations (SDs) to yield a statistic known as the standardized mean difference (SMD). The SD that is used as the divisor is usually either the pooled SD or the SD of the control group; in the former instance, the SMD is known as Cohen's d, and in the latter instance, as Glass' delta. SMDs of 0.2, 0.5, and 0.8 are considered small, medium, and large, respectively. SMDs can be pooled in meta-analysis because the unit is uniform across studies. This article presents and explains the different terms and concepts with the help of simple examples.
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.
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
Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences
Muller, K. E., & Cohen, J. (1989) · Technometrics · doi:10.2307/1270020 · Cited by 99,603
Lakens, D. (2013) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00863 · Cited by 10,303
Analysing data and undertaking meta‐analyses
Deeks, J. J., Higgins, J. P., Altman, D. G., & on behalf of the Cochrane Statistical Methods Group (2019) · Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions · doi:10.1002/9781119536604.ch10 · Cited by 2,672
Andrade, C. (2020) · Indian Journal of Psychological Medicine · doi:10.1177/0253717620933419 · Cited by 89
Self-citationA Primer on Confidence Intervals in Psychopharmacology
Andrade, C. (2015) · The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry · doi:10.4088/jcp.14f09751 · Cited by 35
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 601–700 of 842
Measuring Propensity for Dementia-Related Stigma in Large Language Models
Hagiyama, N., Takimoto, Y., & Kurashima, T. (2026) · CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA) · doi:10.1145/3772363.3798383 · Cited by 1
“We report effect sizes as Glass’s Δ and interpret Δ = 0.20 to 0.50 as small, 0.50 to 0.80 as medium, and 0.80 or greater as large [2].”
InfluentialRodgers‐Melnick, S. N., Love, T. E., Koroukian, S. M., Gunzler, D., Beno, M. F., Razzak, R., Dusek, J. A., & Rose, J. (2026) · Journal of Integrative and Complementary Medicine · doi:10.1177/27683605261444109 · Cited by 1
“A 2015 meta-analysis of both MT and music medicine RCTs found that music interventions had a small effect (standardized mean difference [SMD] 0.2 – 0.5 22 ) on reducing analgesia use (SMD and 95% CI: - 0.37 [ - 0.54, - 0.20], N = 34 RCTs) among adults undergoing surgical procedures.”
InfluentialBouras, M., Pageau, M., Gagnon, M.-A., Costerousse, O., Demers, K., Grenier-Gagnon, A., Isaac, C. J., Torkomyan, T. H., Lauzier, F., Zarychanski, R., et al. (2026) · Critical Care · doi:10.1186/s13054-026-06036-3 · Cited by 1
“An SMD of 0.2 is generally considered a small effect, 0.5 a moderate effect, and 0.8 a large effect [24, 25].”
InfluentialAini, N. S., Su, P.-Y., Sung, C., Chen, R., Chiang, K., Chang, L., Maharani, P. A., Martini, N. M. D. A., Arifin, H., & Chou, K. (2026) · International Journal of Nursing Studies · doi:10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2026.105553 · Cited by 1
Proportions, trends, and outcomes of posterior circulation ischemic stroke in the United States
Qureshi, A. I., Ranjini, N. J., Cohen, D., Spall, S., Roy, A., Cassarly, C. N., Martin, R. H., Powers, W. J., & Kwok, C. S. (2026) · Frontiers in Neurology · doi:10.3389/fneur.2026.1776618 · Cited by 1
“Baseline characteristics were mostly compared using standardized mean differences (SMDs) (18), defined as the difference in group means (or proportions) divided by the pooled standard deviation (SD) and p-values were used for comparing medians (19, 20).”
Comino‐Suárez, N., Herrera, V., Albusac, J. A., Martín-de-Vidales, J., & Reyes, A. D. L. (2026) · American Journal of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation · doi:10.1097/phm.0000000000003032 · Cited by 1
Empowering clinical trial design with agentic intelligence and real-world data
Li, H., Pan, W., Rajendran, S., Zang, C., & Wang, F. (2026) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-026-74501-2 · Cited by 9
“Through an autonomous feedback loop, the Statistician consulted the Clinician, who advised dropping the eosinophil count as it was not a primary confounder for hemodynamic outcomes in this context, allowing the model to achieve satisfactory balance (SMD 0.1).”
InfluentialEspejo-Mansilla, V., Coscia, A., Fuentes-Barría, H., Aguilera-Eguía, R. A., Angarita, L., Flores-Fernández, C., & Roco-Videla, Á. (2026) · Biomedicines · doi:10.3390/biomedicines14071565 · Cited by 1
“Effect sizes were estimated as standardized mean differences (SMDs) using Hedges’ g, allowing comparison across different neonatal pain scales while correcting for small-sample bias according to Cochrane methodology [23,24].”
Patel, P. V., Moses, J., Ali, S. A., Suskind, D. L., Pasternak, B. A., Kaplan, J. L., Samson, C., Manning, L., & Adler, J. (2026) · Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology · doi:10.1016/j.cgh.2026.08.008 · Cited by 1
Wang, C.-A., Wang, W.-J., Liao, H., Jiang, Z.-H., Cheng, C.-Y., Chen, J., & Wu, V. (2026) · Hypertension Research · doi:10.1038/s41440-026-02786-3 · Cited by 1
de Arruda, M. V., Verzili, B., Herrmann, F., Neves, S. F. D., Galduróz, R. F., & Reyes, M. B. (2023) · Contribuciones a las Ciencias Sociales · doi:10.55905/revconv.16n.8-282 · Cited by 1
“We applied the mean difference method, a standard statistical method that in this study, estimates the amount by which the remote collection changes the result on average compared to the live collection (Andrade, 2020).”
MethodHe, Z.-W., Wang, C., Li, Y., Danzeng, A., Liu, F.-B., Shi, J., Ciren, P., Yuan, X.-Y., Wu, C.-X., Lan, R.-H., et al. (2023) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2022-066171 · Cited by 1
Li, L., Wang, J., Xia, W., Li, W. H. C., Weng, X., & Song, P. (2023) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2023-071745 · Cited by 1
Hawker, P. J., Bellamy, J., McHugh, C. M., Wong, T. Y., Williams, K. J., WOOD, A. G., Anderson, V. A., Tonge, B. J., Ward, P. B., Sciberras, E., et al. (2023) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2023-073893 · Cited by 1
Alasmari, M. S., Almohammed, O. A., Hammad, A. M., Altulayhi, K. A., Alkadi, B. K., Alasmari, A. F., Alqahtani, F., Sari, Y., & Alasmari, F. F. (2023) · Neuroscience · doi:10.1016/j.neuroscience.2023.11.014 · Cited by 1
Abbas, M., Carrieri, P., Marcellin, F., Bourlière, M., Parlati, L., Carrat, F., Duracinský, M., & Protopopescu, C. (2024) · Quality of Life Research · doi:10.1007/s11136-024-03622-2 · Cited by 1
“The MCID was defined by d × SD baseline where d corresponds to the value of Cohen’s d effect size: d = 0.2 (small effect), d = 0.5 (moderate effect) or d = 0.8 (large effect) [13].”
InfluentialMuzayyin, M. D., Syahputra, N., & Aini, D. K. (2024) · PALAPA · doi:10.36088/palapa.v12i1.4684 · Cited by 1
Data Imputation with Uncertainty Using Stochastic Physics-Informed Learning
Mai, L., Li, H., & Weng, Y. (2024) · IEEE Power Engineering Society General Meeting · doi:10.1109/pesgm51994.2024.10688419 · Cited by 1
“In particular, MMD, when paired with the appropriate feature representations and kernels [16], achieves better differentiation between two distinct distributions than with many frequently used methods, like the difference of means [17].”
MethodOhnishi, Y., Karmakar, B., & Kar, W. (2024) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.1080/01621459.2024.2435655 · Cited by 1
“An SMD score greater than 0.1 is considered indicative of poor balance.”
InfluentialNair, A. S., Gurajala, I., Borkar, N. B., Dudhedia, U. I., Rangaiah, M., & Diwan, S. M. (2025) · Indian Journal of Anaesthesia · doi:10.4103/ija.ija_825_24 · Cited by 1
“[16,17] Inconsistencies were evaluated using χ 2 and I 2 to assess the clinical heterogeneity in the included studies, and P < 0.10 and I 2 > 50% showed that χ 2 had statistical differences.”
InfluentialVera, A. O., & Enos, C. (2025) · Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology · doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2025.03.058 · Cited by 1
Investigation of Core and Future Competencies Needed for Quantity Surveyors in Nigeria
Oke, A. E., Aliu, J., Ojurongbe, E. T., Aigbavboa, C. O., Aghimien, D. O., & Ebekozien, A. (2025) · International Journal of Construction Education and Research · doi:10.1080/15578771.2025.2485042 · Cited by 1
“In cases of identical mean scores, the study follows Andrade (2020), by considering the SD as a tiebreaker.”
Vahedi, H., Atefi, M., Ghanbarian, M., Darand, M., & Bahraniniya, Z. (2025) · Nutrition & Food Science · doi:10.1108/nfs-12-2024-0401 · Cited by 1
Rodríguez, S., Hernández-Álvarez, E. D., & León-Prieto, C. (2025) · Journal of Bodywork and Movement Therapies · doi:10.1016/j.jbmt.2025.10.026 · Cited by 1
Maqsood, R., Khattab, A., Bennett, A. N., & Boos, C. J. (2022) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0273688 · Cited by 1
“Mean difference (MD) or standardized mean difference (SMD) will be generated if the outcome of interest in the included study is given in the same or different outcome measures on a continuous scale [38], respectively.”
BackgroundSUPERIOR INFERENTIAL STATISTICS OF THE EXPERIMENTAL DATA OF A COMPLEX EXPERIMENTAL CULTIVATOR
Cârdei, P., CONSTANTIN, N., Persu, C., Muraru, V. M., Sfîru, R., Iamandei, M., & Lateș, D. (2023) · INMATEH Agricultural Engineering · doi:10.35633/inmateh-71-12 · Cited by 1
van Til, J. A., Kip, M. M. A., Marinescu-Muster, R., Groothuis-Oudshoorn, C. G. M., Currie, G., Benseler, S., Swart, J., Vastert, S. J., Wulffraat, N. M., Yeung, R., et al. (2024) · Medical Decision Making · doi:10.1177/0272989x231225267 · Cited by 1
Roberge‐Dao, J., Thomas, A., Rochette, A., Shikako‐Thomas, K., & Mayo, N. E. (2024) · medRxiv · doi:10.1101/2024.07.16.24310286 · Cited by 1
Comments on “high-intensity versus low-level laser in musculoskeletal disorders”
Ortiz, H. A. D. L. B., & Liebano, R. E. (2025) · Lasers in Medical Science · doi:10.1007/s10103-025-04313-1 · Cited by 1
“The authors correctly mentioned the use of the SMD to pool results from different instruments measuring the same outcome [8].”
Ortiz, H. A. D. L. B., & Chamorro-Lange, C. (2026) · Journal of Clinical Medicine · doi:10.3390/jcm15176635 · Cited by 1
“particularly when the same instrument is used across studies to assess the same outcome, as in the case of the VAS [15].”
Liu, Y., Wang, Y., Wang, Y., & Jia, X. (2022) · Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine · doi:10.1002/jum.15939
Elliott, H., Moll, E. S., & Olmsted, E. (2022) · doi:10.2196/preprints.36139
Yu, J. C.-K., Shukla, D., Linder, D. F., Doroodchi, A., Agko, M., Doroodchi, R., Chamgordani, H. K., & Lin, A. Y. (2022) · FACE · doi:10.1177/27325016221074213
JABERIZADEH, H. (2022) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4014275
Relative efficacy of virtual and in-office conservative care for musculoskeletal conditions
Elliott, H., Moll, E. S., & Olmsted, E. (2023) · International Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation Journal · doi:10.15406/ipmrj.2023.08.00328
Extraction and Analysis of Data
Kumar, A. (2023) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-981-99-2370-0_4
Ortiz, H. A. D. L. B., Arias, M., & Liebano, R. E. (2023) · Physiotherapy · doi:10.1016/j.physio.2023.09.005
Jutkowitz, E., McCreedy, E. M., Halladay, C. W., & Tsai, J. (2024) · Military Medicine · doi:10.1093/milmed/usad485
Wang, C.-A., Lin, L.-C., Chen, J., Wang, W., & Wu, V. (2024) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4751279
Wang, Q., Lam, L. T.-M., Lin, H., Yang, W., Ying, F., & Li, Y. (2024) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-4435553/v1
Soloniuk, L. J. (2024) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-62756-9_48
Su, Y., Su, Y., & Hsu, S. (2024) · American Journal of Ophthalmology · doi:10.1016/j.ajo.2024.10.032
Gu, A., Huang, A., Wu, B., Liu, X., Huang, C., Qiu, X., & Wang, L. (2025) · doi:10.2196/preprints.71149
Morphological alterations of the thymus gland in individuals with schizophrenia
Zhao, Q., Xia, W., Yu, W., Li, X., Gao, Z., Liu, S., Liu, Z., Wang, K., Bishop, J. R., Hu, H., et al. (2025) · Molecular Psychiatry · doi:10.1038/s41380-025-02946-w
“We chose Glass ’ s delta as the effect size metric instead of Cohen ’ s d for its greater stability in handling variability in case-control scenarios [35].”
Ni, P., Ge, M., Liu, L., & Hu, X. (2025) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2024-093349
“26 If clinical heterogeneity between studies is high or missing data prevent estimation, a narrative synthesis will be used.”
Effects of Probiotic Supplementation on Endurance Performance
Upadhyaya, S., Das, S. K., Sri, T. H., & Cherian, K. S. (2025) · Nutrition Today · doi:10.1097/nt.0000000000000737
Yu, Y.-L., Fu, J., Feng, Z.-W., Zhang, W., Dai, D.-F., Wang, M.-T., Zhou, Y., & Chen, X. (2025) · Journal of Surgical Research · doi:10.1016/j.jss.2025.02.028
Ahadi, T., Akbari, N., Janbazi, L., Forogh, B., Hatam, S., Sadooghi-Moshaki, E., & Cham, M. B. (2025) · Annals of Military and Health Sciences Research · doi:10.5812/amh-160067
Stefanel, M. E. R., de Souza, L. M., Macedo, F. T. D. A., Moreira, D. D., Silva, R. F., Angelakopoulos, N., Vieira, W. D. A., Paranhos, L. R., & Franco, A. (2025) · Forensic Science Medicine and Pathology · doi:10.1007/s12024-024-00906-4
“Taking the Brazilian population as the example of an expressively misleading SMD, it is possible to observe that the SMD for the right and left MΔ areas were 0.96 (CI from -0.36 to 2.27) and 0.66 (CI from -1.65; 2.96), which indicate moderate and large sex differences [46], respectively.”
InfluentialYuan, Y., & Song, M. (2025) · Research in Community and Public Health Nursing · doi:10.12799/rcphn.2024.00570 · Cited by 2
“For the Continuous variables, MD was used for analysis when measurements were unified, and when measurements were non-unified, the SMD was used for analysis [31,32].”
Dalabeh, I. O., Kontor, E. K., Adi, M., Elenien, W. I. A., Al-Zayadneh, A. A., Dalabeh, M. O., Badawy, S. G. A., & Jain, N. (2025) · Advanced Orthopaedics · doi:10.1016/j.advop.2025.04.003
Arenos, C. L. C., Huan-Jacinto, F. Y. D. C., Lucero, J. A., Ting, F. I. L., Mendoza, M. J., Amante, M. A., Sacdalan, D. B., & Vergara, J. P. (2025) · Journal of Respiration · doi:10.3390/jor5020007
“When possible, the standard mean difference (SMD) was determined, as this measure controlled for differences in the HRQoL instruments used across studies [23].”
InfluentialRisk of Neurodevelopmental Disorders in the Offspring of Young Female Cancer Survivors
Choi, K., Heo, J., Oh, S.-Y., Yu, J., Sung, J., Kim, I., Jeong, S., & Kang, D. (2025) · Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders · doi:10.1007/s10803-025-06926-5
“(Andrade, 2020) The incidence of NDDs was followed from the date of birth until the date of incidence of NDDs, death, or the end of follow-up (December 31, 2020), whichever came first.”
Breaking Down Bias: On The Limits of Generalizable Pruning Strategies
Ma, S., Salinas, A., Henderson, P., & Nyarko, J. (2025) · ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (FAccT) · doi:10.1145/3715275.3732161
“The SMD measures the difference in means between two groups (Black-and white-associated names) relative to the pooled standard deviation Andrade [2].”
Predikce čtenářského sebehodnocení v testové baterii PorTex
Katedra psychologie, P. F. U. K., Špačková, K., Presslerová, P., Kucharská, A., & Chvál, M. (2025) · Ceskoslovenska psychologie · doi:10.51561/cspsych.69.3.235
Psychiatric Coercion: Ethical Conditions and Empirical Data
Richter, D. (2025) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-98635-2_4
Finati, M., Ricapito, A., Musi, G., Rocco, B. M. C., Porpiglia, F., Antonelli, A., Gontero, P., Boström, P. J., Schips, L., Simone, G., et al. (2025) · British Journal of Urology · doi:10.1111/bju.16903
“Standardised mean difference did not differ by more than 0.1 for all the covariates included in the matching, indicating a well-balanced match [7] (Table S1).”
InfluentialBawazir, R. O., Qedair, J. T., Bukhari, Z. M., Badghaish, O., Hubayni, R. A., Alsudais, A. S., & Qutub, M. F. (2025) · Clinical ophthalmology · doi:10.2147/opth.s529633
Zhang, X., Lou, Q., Liou, S., & Wang, X. (2025) · Journal of Health Population and Nutrition · doi:10.1186/s41043-025-01067-y
“To allow for comparisons across different measurement scales, weighted mean differences (WMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated [16].”
The effectiveness of vitamin B6 in reducing mastalgia: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Sharifipour, F., Siahkal, S. F., & Bagherinia, M. (2025) · BMC Women s Health · doi:10.1186/s12905-025-03991-x
“We interpreted the SMD effect size as small for values between 0.2 and 0.5, medium for values between 0.5 and 0.8, and large for values greater than 0.8 [31].”
InfluentialZoupas, I., Sarantopoulos, A., Schizas, N. C., Boultadakis, V., Koukis, I., Manna, I., & Iliopoulos, D. (2025) · Heart Lung and Circulation · doi:10.1016/j.hlc.2025.03.020
Kim, S., & Cho, S.-H. (2025) · Physical Therapy · doi:10.1093/ptj/pzaf112
Jia, Y., Wu, P., Jiang, Y., Yao, Y., Long, Y., Liu, J., Wang, S., Yang, Z., Wang, W., Wang, Y., et al. (2025) · Med · doi:10.1016/j.medj.2025.100878
Malik, M. I., Capucchio, M. T., Tunkala, B. Z., Muneeb, M., Ncho, C. M., Hao, L., & Cheng, L. (2025) · Journal of Animal Science · doi:10.1093/jas/skaf362
Che, L., Wang, J., Wu, R., & Su, R. (2025) · CRANIO® · doi:10.1080/08869634.2025.2568806
“SMD was calculated when different studies employed different scales to measure the same construct, as this approach standardizes effect sizes by dividing the mean difference by the pooled standard deviation, thereby enabling comparability across heterogeneous instruments [14].”
Effects of dance on quality of life among people with Parkinson's disease: Meta-analyses
Yang, H., Chen, Y., Gu, S., & Tang, X.-H. (2025) · The Arts in Psychotherapy · doi:10.1016/j.aip.2025.102378
Chao, H.-N., Tsai, Y.-L., Hsu, J. H., Chan, Y.-C., Chen, P., & Wu, C. (2025) · Kidney Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.xkme.2025.101171
“28,29 All the statistical analyses mentioned above were conducted using R (version 4.3.0, R Foundation for Statistical Computing) software.”
InfluentialAlqallaf, A., Alharran, A. M., Пенчев, П., Alkandari, Y. Y., Almulla, B., Almulla, A., AL-Shatti, A., AlAyyaf, A. E., Alahmad, A., & Al-Naseem, A. (2025) · Journal of Clinical Medicine · doi:10.3390/jcm14238352
“Conventional thresholds were applied, with absolute effect sizes of approximately 0.20, 0.50, and 0.80 considered small, moderate, and large, respectively [22].”
InfluentialSiddiqui, H. P., Kuijpers‐Jagtman, A. M., Angel, S. L., Sennimalai, K., & Selvaraj, M. (2025) · Journal of the World Federation of Orthodontists · doi:10.1016/j.ejwf.2025.10.005
Wang, S., Chan, T., Lee, Y., Wang, Y., Chou, C., Chang, Y., Tsai, H., Lee, H., Lip, G. Y. H., Chiang, C., et al. (2025) · British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology · doi:10.1002/bcp.70416
“53 Covariate balance was assessed using standardized mean differences (SMD), with values >0.2 indicating imbalance 54 ; these variables were further adjusted for in the Cox proportional hazards models.”
InfluentialWhitbourne, S. B., Williams, A. R., Brewer, J. V., Deen, J. E., Lord, E. M., Murphy, S. A., Li, Y., Ho, Y.-L. A., Pyatt, M., Wolfrum, S. G., et al. (2025) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-8272722/v1
Sobeeh, M. G., Hassan, K. A., da Silva, A. G., Youssef, E. F., Fayaz, N. A., & Mohammed, M. M. (2023) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.22599433
Karimi, M., Pirzad, S., Shirsalimi, N., Ahmadizad, S., Hashemi, S. M., Karami, S., Kazemi, K., Shahir-Roudi, E., & Aminzadeh, A. (2024) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.27042480
Sobeeh, M. G., Hassan, K. A., da Silva, A. G., Youssef, E. F., Fayaz, N. A., & Mohammed, M. M. (2023) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.22599367
Sobeeh, M. G., Hassan, K. A., da Silva, A. G., Youssef, E. F., Fayaz, N. A., & Mohammed, M. M. (2023) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.22599361
Sobeeh, M. G., Hassan, K. A., da Silva, A. G., Youssef, E. F., Fayaz, N. A., & Mohammed, M. M. (2023) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.22599316
Sobeeh, M. G., Hassan, K. A., da Silva, A. G., Youssef, E. F., Fayaz, N. A., & Mohammed, M. M. (2023) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.22599451
Sobeeh, M. G., Hassan, K. A., da Silva, A. G., Youssef, E. F., Fayaz, N. A., & Mohammed, M. M. (2023) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.22599373
Sobeeh, M. G., Hassan, K. A., da Silva, A. G., Youssef, E. F., Fayaz, N. A., & Mohammed, M. M. (2023) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.22599334
Sobeeh, M. G., Hassan, K. A., da Silva, A. G., Youssef, E. F., Fayaz, N. A., & Mohammed, M. M. (2023) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.22599397
Sobeeh, M. G., Hassan, K. A., da Silva, A. G., Youssef, E. F., Fayaz, N. A., & Mohammed, M. M. (2023) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.22599436
Bahreiny, S. S., Bastani, M.-N., Dabbagh, M. R., Ghorbani, H., Aghaei, M., Zahedian, M., & Fard, R. M. (2024) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.24934235
Ieong, C., Chen, T., Chen, S., Gao, X., Yan, K., He, W., Hong, H., Gu, Y., Chen, X., & Yuan, G. (2024) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.26289142
Sobeeh, M. G., Hassan, K. A., da Silva, A. G., Youssef, E. F., Fayaz, N. A., & Mohammed, M. M. (2023) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.22599352
Sobeeh, M. G., Hassan, K. A., da Silva, A. G., Youssef, E. F., Fayaz, N. A., & Mohammed, M. M. (2023) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.22599445
Sobeeh, M. G., Hassan, K. A., da Silva, A. G., Youssef, E. F., Fayaz, N. A., & Mohammed, M. M. (2023) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.22599331
Sobeeh, M. G., Hassan, K. A., da Silva, A. G., Youssef, E. F., Fayaz, N. A., & Mohammed, M. M. (2023) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.22599358
Sobeeh, M. G., Hassan, K. A., da Silva, A. G., Youssef, E. F., Fayaz, N. A., & Mohammed, M. M. (2023) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.22599343
Sobeeh, M. G., Hassan, K. A., da Silva, A. G., Youssef, E. F., Fayaz, N. A., & Mohammed, M. M. (2023) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.22599409
Sobeeh, M. G., Hassan, K. A., da Silva, A. G., Youssef, E. F., Fayaz, N. A., & Mohammed, M. M. (2023) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.22599370
Sobeeh, M. G., Hassan, K. A., da Silva, A. G., Youssef, E. F., Fayaz, N. A., & Mohammed, M. M. (2023) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.22599328
Sobeeh, M. G., Hassan, K. A., da Silva, A. G., Youssef, E. F., Fayaz, N. A., & Mohammed, M. M. (2023) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.22599346
Sobeeh, M. G., Hassan, K. A., da Silva, A. G., Youssef, E. F., Fayaz, N. A., & Mohammed, M. M. (2023) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.22599391
Chan-Víquez, D., Fernández-Huertas, H., Montserrat-Gonzalez, C., Khan, A., Fehlings, D. L., Munce, S., Wright, F. V., & Biddiss, E. A. (2024) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.26945937
Sobeeh, M. G., Hassan, K. A., da Silva, A. G., Youssef, E. F., Fayaz, N. A., & Mohammed, M. M. (2023) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.22599400
McDaniel, B. T., Cornet, V. P., Carroll, J., Chrones, L., Chudzik, J., Cochran, J., Guha, S., Lawrence, D. F. E., McCue, M., Sarkey, S., et al. (2024) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.26653461
Sobeeh, M. G., Hassan, K. A., da Silva, A. G., Youssef, E. F., Fayaz, N. A., & Mohammed, M. M. (2023) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.22599388
Sobeeh, M. G., Hassan, K. A., da Silva, A. G., Youssef, E. F., Fayaz, N. A., & Mohammed, M. M. (2023) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.22599442
Sobeeh, M. G., Hassan, K. A., da Silva, A. G., Youssef, E. F., Fayaz, N. A., & Mohammed, M. M. (2023) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.22599448
Daneshvar, M., Ghaheri, M., Safarzadeh, D., Karimi, F., Adib-Hajbagheri, P., Ahmadzade, M., & Haedi, A. (2024) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.26731264
Metadata
- Authors
- Andrade, C.
- Affiliations
- National Institute of Mental Health and Neurosciences (IN)
- Corresponding author
- Andrade, Chittaranjan
- Venue
- The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry
- Publisher
- Physicians Postgraduate Press, Inc
- Published
- 2020-09-22
- Volume
- 81
- Issue
- 5
- ISSN
- 0160-6689 (ISSN-L)
- 1555-2101
- OpenAlex
- W3089264828
- Cited by
- 841
- References
- 5
- Citations by year
- 2026: 158 · 2025: 221 · 2024: 199 · 2023: 161 · 2022: 77 · 2021: 25
- FWCI
- 40.09
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Delphi Technique in Research
- Keywords
- mean difference, standardized mean difference, Cohen's d, effect size, meta-analysis, change scores, rating instruments, effect size heterogeneity
- MeSH terms
- Data Interpretation, Statistical, Humans, Statistics as Topic, Meta-Analysis as Topic
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