Cargando…
The puzzling relationship between multi-laboratory replications and meta-analyses of the published literature
What is the best way to estimate the size of important effects? Should we aggregate across disparate findings using statistical meta-analysis, or instead run large, multi-laboratory replications (MLR)? A recent paper by Kvarven, Strømland and Johannesson (Kvarven et al. 2020 Nat. Hum. Behav. 4, 423–...
Autores principales: | Lewis, Molly, Mathur, Maya B., VanderWeele, Tyler J., Frank, Michael C. |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
The Royal Society
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8864345/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35223059 http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsos.211499 |
Ejemplares similares
-
New metrics for meta‐analyses of heterogeneous effects
por: Mathur, Maya B., et al.
Publicado: (2018) -
Sensitivity analysis for publication bias in meta‐analyses
por: Mathur, Maya B., et al.
Publicado: (2020) -
Sensitivity Analysis for Unmeasured Confounding in Meta-Analyses
por: Mathur, Maya B., et al.
Publicado: (2019) -
Eleven years of student replication projects provide evidence on the correlates of replicability in psychology
por: Boyce, Veronica, et al.
Publicado: (2023) -
Commentary: Developing best-practice guidelines for the reporting of E-values
por: VanderWeele, Tyler J, et al.
Publicado: (2020)