| Title |
Methods for Synthesizing Findings on Moderation Effects Across Multiple Randomized Trials
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Prevention Science, March 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11121-011-0207-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
C. Hendricks Brown, Zili Sloboda, Fabrizio Faggiano, Brent Teasdale, Ferdinand Keller, Gregor Burkhart, Federica Vigna-Taglianti, George Howe, Katherine Masyn, Wei Wang, Bengt Muthén, Peggy Stephens, Scott Grey, Tatiana Perrino, Prevention Science and Methodology Group |
| Abstract |
This paper presents new methods for synthesizing results from subgroup and moderation analyses across different randomized trials. We demonstrate that such a synthesis generally results in additional power to detect significant moderation findings above what one would find in a single trial. Three general methods for conducting synthesis analyses are discussed, with two methods, integrative data analysis and parallel analyses, sharing a large advantage over traditional methods available in meta-analysis. We present a broad class of analytic models to examine moderation effects across trials that can be used to assess their overall effect and explain sources of heterogeneity, and present ways to disentangle differences across trials due to individual differences, contextual level differences, intervention, and trial design. |
Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 4% |
| Australia | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 63 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 16 | 24% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 14 | 21% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 9 | 13% |
| Professor | 6 | 9% |
| Other | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 7 | 10% |
| Unknown | 11 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 18 | 27% |
| Social Sciences | 13 | 19% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 12 | 18% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 4% |
| Mathematics | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 4 | 6% |
| Unknown | 15 | 22% |