Hello,
I am working on a meta-analysis and would like to include the following paper: [McAuley et al., 2007](https://www-sciencedirect-com.proxy-um.researchport.umd.edu/science/article/pii/S1053811906009207?via%3Dihub#aep-section-id17)
In Table 4 they only report the magnitude and effect sizes (Cohen’s d) instead of a raw statistic (e.g. T-max or Z-max). Can I include the effect size under “Value,” and would the classification of this metric be “Other” in the Statistic drop down menu? Considering the output from the meta-analysis are the effect sizes, is it possible to include effect sizes rather than raw statistics in Extraction?
Thank you in advance!
Hello!
Can you give me the DOI of that paper so I can look it up? The link is not working for me (it’s through UMD).
For the majority of coordinate based meta-analyses (CBMA), we actually ignore the statistic in the meta-analytic algorithms. The only thing that we look at is the actual coordinates that are report.
So for something like MKDADensity (default estimator), what you suggest would be appropriate since it would not even look at the statistic or effect size.
That said, there are other cases where it might matter, and we should have a better option rather than “Other”. It just happens that reporting effect sizes is relatively rare.
Please let us know if you have other questions!
Thanks for your quick response! The DOI link is: Redirecting
This is good to know; this is the only paper I’m including that reported effect sizes, so I was unsure how to proceed! Thanks for the clarification.
Got it. Yep, no need to worry about those effect sizes. Feel free to enter them, but the algorithm (MKDADensity) would work even without.
Let us know if you have any other doubts.