Thanks!
Sorry, I forgot to add the output of meta.summaries:
Random-effects meta-analysis
Call: meta.summaries(d = CoeffVector, se = StdErrorVector,
method = "random",
logscale = FALSE)
Summary effect=NaN 95% CI (NaN, NaN)
If anyone has further hints, what the problem is, that would be great. I've
found out by
now that STATA gives me a result for my data, if that's any help.
Best regards,
Katrin
> > meta.summaries
> > --------------
> >
> > What does it mean, when I get the warning message that NaNs were
> > produced in "pchisq(q, df, lower.tail, log.p)"? Is there something
> > wrong with my data (there are no NAs in the data)?
> >
> > MetaAnalyse <- meta.summaries(CoeffVector,
> > StdErrorVector,
> > method = "random")
> >
>
> It means that NaNs were produced. You should be able to see
> where from the output. It's hard to say more without more information.
______________________________________________
[email protected] mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
