2016•Statistics in MedicineOpen access

Meta-analysis of ratios of sample variances

Luke A. Prendergast, Robert G. Staudte

Open full text 12 citations

Abstract

When conducting a meta-analysis of standardized mean differences (SMDs), it is common to use Cohen's d, or its variants, that require equal variances in the two arms of each study. While interpretation of these SMDs is simple, this alone should not be used as a justification for assuming equal variances. Until now, researchers have either used an F-test for each individual study or perhaps even conveniently ignored such tools altogether. In this paper, we propose a meta-analysis of ratios of sample variances to assess whether the equality of variances assumptions is justified prior to a meta-analysis of SMDs. Quantile-quantile plots, an omnibus test for equal variances or an overall meta-estimate of the ratio of variances can all be used to formally justify the use of less common methods when evidence of unequal variances is found. The methods in this paper are simple to implement and the validity of the approaches are reinforced by simulation studies and an application to a real data set.

Open-access reader

About this research paper

What this paper is about

When conducting a meta-analysis of standardized mean differences (SMDs), it is common to use Cohen's d, or its variants, that require equal variances in the two arms of each study. While interpretation of these SMDs is simple, this alone should not be used as a justification for assuming equal variances. Until now, researchers have either used an F-test for each individual study or perhaps even conveniently ignored such tools altogether. In this paper, we propose a meta-analysis of ratios of sample variances to assess whether the equality of variances assumptions is justified prior to a meta-analysis of SMDs. Quantile-quantile plots, an omnibus test for equal variances or an overall meta-estimate of the ratio of variances can all be used to formally justify the use of less common methods when evidence of unequal variances is found. The methods in this paper are simple to implement and the validity of the approaches are reinforced by simulation studies and an application to a real data set.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 12 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

When conducting a meta-analysis of standardized mean differences (SMDs), it is common to use Cohen's d, or its variants, that require equal variances in the two arms of each study. While interpretation of these SMDs is simple, this alone should not be used as a justification for assuming equal variances. Until now, researchers have either used an F-test for each individual study or perhaps even conveniently ignored such tools altogether. In this paper, we propose a meta-analysis of ratios of sample variances to assess whether the equality of variances assumptions is justified prior to a meta-analysis of SMDs. Quantile-quantile plots, an omnibus test for equal variances or an overall meta-estimate of the ratio of variances can all be used to formally justify the use of less common methods when evidence of unequal variances is found. The methods in this paper are simple to implement and the validity of the approaches are reinforced by simulation studies and an application to a real data set.

Key concepts: Statistics, Estimator, Levene's test, Variance (accounting), Mathematics, Confidence interval, Econometrics, Sample size determination

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Meta-analysis of ratios of sample variances — Research Paper | ScholarLens