similar to: dummy encoding in metafor

Dear R-experts! In a meta-analysis (metafor) I would like to assess the effect of two categorical covariates (A & B) whereas they both have 4 levels. Is my understanding correct that this would require to dummy-code (0,1) each level of each covariate (A & B)? However I am interested in the main-effects and the interaction of these two covariates and the dummy-coding would only allow to

Dear all, I'm currently applying a mixed model approach to meta analysis using the package metafor. I use the "model.matrix()" function to create dummy variables. The option btt gives me the combined test for the dummies. Problem is, I don't know which indices I have to use, and can't really figure it out from the help file and the examples. I use following code : X <-

Hi, I am a student using R for my final year project, with the metafor package being particularly helpful. I have been following the steps laid out in the manual 'Conducting Meta-analysis in R with the Metafor package' (Viechtbauer, 2010) and applying it to my own data of infected Anopheles mosquitoes across Africa. In particular, I am attempting to apply a mixed-effect model to my data

Hi I have tryed to do the meta-regression in metafor package, but I would like to get the standardized coefficients for each variable, however in command:   Ø  res<-rma.uni (yi, vi, method="REML", mods=~cota+DL+uso+gadiente+idade, data= turbidez)   I just have the coefficients no standardized (estimate) of the multiple regression. What I need to do? Thanks Fernanda Melo

Dear R community, I'm using the ,metafor'-package by Wolfgang Viechtbauer (Version: 0.5-5) to calculate random-effects meta-analyses using Correlations and Sample Sizes as the raw data. (By the way: Really a nice piece of work, Wolfgang! Thanks heaps.) I specified the "rma.uni' function so that it looks like this: MAergebnis<-rma.uni(ri=PosOutc, ni=N,

? stato filtrato un testo allegato il cui set di caratteri non era indicato... Nome: non disponibile URL: <https://stat.ethz.ch/pipermail/r-help/attachments/20110220/1f45c288/attachment.pl>

Hello, Reid. > Fortunately, with SVN, making such a change isn't hard and its tracked > in the commits. Anyone object or have other ideas in this realm? I'm also confused. At one hand, proposed layout (with BTT in the top) seems to be "unnatural", when we will create new tags/branches. In theory, each module can have its own version, thus if the want to "tag"

Dear R-experts! I am working on some meta-analysis using the metafor package. I would like to extract values of the confidence intervals of the effect sizes of the single studies from an rma object. Those values are printed out when plotting a forest plot using the forest function on the rma object, however I was not able to locate them. Many thanks for your help! Jokel [[alternative HTML

Dear R users, In metafor 1.6-0, the Mantel-Haenszel method is implemented by the rma.mh() function. I have observed that the sum of the weights computed by weights(x) doesn't add to 100% when x is an object of class rma.mh. The consequences of this fact can be clearly seen when a forest diagram is drawn with forest(x), which calls weights(x) (or more precisely, the method weights.rma.mh()

Hi (R 2.13.1, OSX 10.6.8) I am trying to use predict.rma with continuous and categorical variables. The argument newmods in predict.rma seems to handle coviariates, but appears to falter on factors. While I realise that the coefficients for factors provide the answers, the goal is to eventually use predict.rma with ANCOVA type model with an interaction. Here is a self contained example

Hello, I experimented the Metafor and Meta packages in the scope of replacing Excel for meta-analysis. I performed the first working example provided in Michael Borenstein's book "Introduction to Meta-Analysis" with Excel, Metafor and Meta. The numbers given by my spreadsheet, which I validated from Borenstein's book, conrespond quite closely to those given by Meta, but

Dear R-experts, The forest.rma() function from the metafor package creates nice forest plots for presenting the results of a meta-analysis. These plots can be annotated for e.g. giving names to the columns. E.g. as in the documentation of the package: data(dat.bcg) ### meta-analysis of the log relative risks using a random-effects model res <- rma(ai=tpos, bi=tneg, ci=cpos, di=cneg,

Dear Metafor users, I'm conducting a metaanalysis of prevalence of a particular behaviour based on someone elses' code. I've been labouring under the impression that this: summary(rma.1<-rma(yi,vi,mods=cbind(approxmeanage,interviewmethodcode),data=mal,method="DL",knha=F,weighted=F,intercept=T)) is doing the multivariate analysis that i want, but have read that

I'm puzzled by the behaviour of factors in rma models, see example and comments below. I'm sure there's a simple explanation but can't see it... Thanks for any input John Hodgson ------------------------------------- code/selected output ----------------- library(metafor) ## Set up data (from Lenters et al A Meta-analysis of Asbestos and Lung Cancer... ##

Hello, Great to see the new metafor package for meta-analysis. I would like to perform a meta-analysis in which I initially calculate the intercept of the model with a nested random-effects structure. In lme, this would be model<- lme(v3~1, random=~1|species/study, weights = varFixed(~Wt), method = "REML") where multiple effects sizes are measured for some studies and more than

Hello. A quick question about incorporating variation due to study in the metafor package. I'm working with a particular data set for meta-analysis where some studies have multiple measurements. Others do not. So, let's say the effect I'm looking at is response to two different kinds of drug treatment - let's call their effect sizes T1 and T2. Some studies have multiple

Hello metafor users, I'm using metafor to perform a single-effect summary estimate of the raw proportion of patients experiencing a post-operative complication, and I'm interested in seeing if this proportion differs between the three most commonly used surgical techniques. The software is working as expected, but I would like to double check on the interpretation of my mixed-effect model

Hi, I would like to do a meta-analysis, i.e., a mixed-effects regression, but I don't seem to get what I want using both the nlme or metafor packages. My question: is there indeed no way to do it? And if so, is there another package I could use? Here are the details: In my meta-analysis I'm comparing different studies that report a measure at time zero and after a certain followup

Hi Dr. Viechtbauer, I'm doing meta-analysis using your package 'metafor'. I used the 'IRFT' to transform the incident rate. But when I tried to back-transform the summary estimates from function rma, I don't know what's the appropriate ti to feed in function transf.iirft. I searched and found your post about using harmonic mean for ni to back-transform the double

Dear Wolfgang Viechtbauer and R users, I have few questions regarding the development of the package 'metafor. As you suggested , I post to the R-help mailing list. I read you're planning an extension of this method to the multivariate case. I think it would be a useful tool. I'm currently performing some analyses with R on multiple outcomes, using the Stata command mvmeta to get