Table 2 Methods used for meta-analysis (n = 152)
From: How are systematic reviews of prevalence conducted? A methodological study
Characteristic | Description |
|---|---|
Methods approach | Classic: 151 (99.3%) |
Bayesian: 1 (0.7%) | |
Modela | Random-effects: 141 (93.4%) |
Fixed-effects: 7 (4.6%) | |
Other: 2 (1.3%) | |
Not reported: 7 (4.6%) | |
Variance estimator (for random-effect metanalysis,n = 141) | DerSimonian and Laird: 30 (21.3%) |
Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman: 4 (2.8%) | |
Restricted maximum-likelihood: 1 (0.7%) | |
Not reported: 106 (75.2%) | |
Transformation | Freeman-Tukey double arcsine: 32 (21.1%) |
Logit: 5 (3.3%) | |
Log: 4 (2.6%) | |
Raw: 2 (1.3%) | |
Arcsine: 1 (0.7%) | |
Arcsine square roots: 1 (0.7%) | |
Not reported: 107 (70.4%) | |
Heterogeneity assessmenta | Subgroup analysis: 89 (58.6%) |
Meta-regression: 57 (37.5%) | |
I2: 144 (94.7%) | |
Galbraith plot: 4 (2.6%) | |
Other (eg. influence analysis, outliers): 54 (35.5%) | |
Publication bias | Begg’s test: 26 (17.1%) |
Egger test: 54 (35.5%) | |
Funnel plot: 56 (36.8%) | |
Doi plot: 4 (2.6%) | |
Trim and fill: 7 (4.6%) | |
LFK index: 4 (2.6%) | |
Not reported: 79 (52.0%) | |
Prediction interval | Yes: 3 (2.0%) |
Not reported: 149 (98.0%) | |
Softwarea | STATA: 83 (54.6%) |
R: 29 (19.1%) | |
Comprehensive Meta-analysis: 14 (9.2%) | |
MetaXL: 11 (7.2%) | |
MedCalc: 5 (3.3%) | |
Review Manager: 3 (2.0%) | |
Open Metanalyst: 3 (2.0%) | |
StatsDirect: 3 (2.0%) | |
MedScale: 1 (0.7%) | |
Not reported: 5 (3.3%) |