Quantitative evidence synthesis: a practical guide on meta-analysis, meta-regression, and publication bias tests for environmental sciences

被引:0
作者
Shinichi Nakagawa
Yefeng Yang
Erin L. Macartney
Rebecca Spake
Malgorzata Lagisz
机构
[1] University of New South Wales,Evolution & Ecology Research Centre and School of Biological, Earth and Environmental Sciences
[2] Okinawa Institute of Science and Technology Graduate University,Theoretical Sciences Visiting Program
[3] University of Reading,School of Biological Sciences, Whiteknights Campus
来源
Environmental Evidence | / 12卷
关键词
Hierarchical models; Robust variance estimation; Spatial dependency; Variance–covariance matrix; Meta-analysis of variance; Missing data; Network meta-analysis; Multivariate meta-analysis;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Meta-analysis is a quantitative way of synthesizing results from multiple studies to obtain reliable evidence of an intervention or phenomenon. Indeed, an increasing number of meta-analyses are conducted in environmental sciences, and resulting meta-analytic evidence is often used in environmental policies and decision-making. We conducted a survey of recent meta-analyses in environmental sciences and found poor standards of current meta-analytic practice and reporting. For example, only ~ 40% of the 73 reviewed meta-analyses reported heterogeneity (variation among effect sizes beyond sampling error), and publication bias was assessed in fewer than half. Furthermore, although almost all the meta-analyses had multiple effect sizes originating from the same studies, non-independence among effect sizes was considered in only half of the meta-analyses. To improve the implementation of meta-analysis in environmental sciences, we here outline practical guidance for conducting a meta-analysis in environmental sciences. We describe the key concepts of effect size and meta-analysis and detail procedures for fitting multilevel meta-analysis and meta-regression models and performing associated publication bias tests. We demonstrate a clear need for environmental scientists to embrace multilevel meta-analytic models, which explicitly model dependence among effect sizes, rather than the commonly used random-effects models. Further, we discuss how reporting and visual presentations of meta-analytic results can be much improved by following reporting guidelines such as PRISMA-EcoEvo (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses for Ecology and Evolutionary Biology). This paper, along with the accompanying online tutorial, serves as a practical guide on conducting a complete set of meta-analytic procedures (i.e., meta-analysis, heterogeneity quantification, meta-regression, publication bias tests and sensitivity analysis) and also as a gateway to more advanced, yet appropriate, methods.
引用
收藏
相关论文
共 495 条
  • [1] Vetter D(2013)Meta-analysis: a need for well-defined usage in ecology and conservation biology Ecosphere 4 1-182
  • [2] Rucker G(2018)Meta-analysis and the science of research synthesis Nature 555 175-437
  • [3] Storch I(2017)Use of meta-analysis in forest biodiversity research: key challenges and considerations Forest Ecol Manag 400 429-77
  • [4] Gurevitch J(2014)On the use of systematic reviews to inform environmental policies Environ Sci Policy 42 67-504
  • [5] Koricheva J(1998)Fixed- and random-effects models in meta-analysis Psychol Methods 3 486-2425
  • [6] Nakagawa S(2017)Nonindependence and sensitivity analyses in ecological and evolutionary meta-analyses Mol Ecol 26 2410-154
  • [7] Stewart G(2017)Meta-evaluation of meta-analysis: ten appraisal questions for biologists Bmc Biol 15 1-844
  • [8] Spake R(2022)An assessment of statistical methods for nonindependent data in ecological meta-analyses: comment Ecology 103 142-82
  • [9] Doncaster CP(2021)Reliability of evidence-review methods in restoration ecology Conserv Biol 35 828-641
  • [10] Bilotta GS(2014)Uses and misuses of meta-analysis in plant ecology J Ecol 102 75-21