Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

CiteULike is a free service for managing and discovering scholarly references - click here to get started.

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Educational and Psychological Measurement
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Sánchez-Meca, J.
Right arrow Articles by Marín-Martínez, F.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Meta-Analysis of 2 x 2 Tables: Estimating a Common Risk Difference

Julio Sánchez-Meca

Fulgencio Marín-Martínez

Universidad de Murcia

Five procedures for estimating a common risk difference in a set of independent 2 x 2 tables were assessed via Monte Carlo simulation in terms of their bias, efficiency, confidence level adjustment, and statistical power. The maximum likelihood estimator showed the best performance, very closely followed by Cochran’s and Mantel-Haenszel’s procedures. The conditional weighted estimator, dCW, showed an irregular performace. The unweighted estimator, dU, showed less efficiency and statistical power than that of the other procedures. As a consequence, the use of the dCW and dU estimators is not recommended. The implications of the results in the practice of meta-analysis are discussed.

Educational and Psychological Measurement, Vol. 61, No. 2, 249-276 (2001)
DOI: 10.1177/00131640121971220
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Educational and Psychological MeasurementHome page
W.-C. Wang and H.-C. Chen
The Standardized Mean Difference within the Framework of Item Response Theory
Educational and Psychological Measurement, April 1, 2004; 64(2): 201 - 223.
[Abstract] [PDF]