In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Rich Ulrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Wed, 28 Jun 2000 15:22:06 +0200, Bernd Genser
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>BG >
>" I have a number of studies who estimate an unknown proportion
>(incidence of a rare disease). What is the correct way to estimate a
>global proportion by a meta-analytic approach from different
>independent studies?"
The problem can be extremely difficult. For a straight
meta study to be remotely correct, one would need to know
about the studies NOT published. Typically, those which
did not have a "statistically significant" result would
be less likely to appear, and this would make the estimate,
and in fact most of the studies, too high.
This has occurred in physics.
--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Dept. of Statistics, Purdue Univ., West Lafayette IN47907-1399
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558
===========================================================================
This list is open to everyone. Occasionally, less thoughtful
people send inappropriate messages. Please DO NOT COMPLAIN TO
THE POSTMASTER about these messages because the postmaster has no
way of controlling them, and excessive complaints will result in
termination of the list.
For information about this list, including information about the
problem of inappropriate messages and information about how to
unsubscribe, please see the web page at
http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/
===========================================================================
