Meta-analysis

Meta-analysis is a set of statistical procedures designed to accumulate

experimental and correlational results across independent studies that address a
related set of research questions. Unlike traditional research methods, meta-analysis
uses the summary statistics from individual studies as the data points. A key assumption
of this analysis is that each study provides a differing estimate of the underlying
relationship within the population (rho). By accumulating results across studies, one
can gain a more accurate representation of the population relationship than is provided
by the individual study estimators.
A meta-analysis is a statistical practice of combining the results of a number
of studies that address a set of related research hypotheses. The first meta-analysis
was performed by Karl Pearson in 1904, in an attempt to overcome the problem of
reduced statistical power in studies with small sample sizes; analyzing the results
from a group of studies can allow more accurate estimation of effects.
Meta-analysis is a collection of systematic techniques for resolving apparent
contradictions in research findings. Meta-analysts translate results from different studies
to a common metric and statistically explore relations between study characteristics and
findings.
Although meta-analysis is widely used in evidence-based medicine today, a
meta-analysis of a medical treatment was not published till 1955. In the 1970s more
sophisticated analytical techniques were introduced in educational research, starting
with the work of Gene V Glass. The online Oxford English Dictionary lists the first
usage of the term in the statistical sense as 1976 by Glass. Meta-analysis refers to the
analysis of analyses . . . the statistical analysis of a large collection of analysis results
from individual studies for the purpose of integrating the findings. It connotes a rigorous
alternative to the casual, narrative discussions of research studies which typify our
attempts to make sense of the rapidly expanding research literature.”
(Glass, 1976, p 3). The statistical theory surrounding meta-analysis was greatly
advanced by the work of Larry V. Hedges and Ingram Olkin.
Because the results from different studies investigating different dependent
variables are measured on different scales, the dependent variable in a meta-analysis is
some standard measure of effect size. To describe the results of comparative
experiments the usual effect size indicator is the standardized mean difference (d) which
is the standard score equivalent to the difference between means, or an odds ratio if the
outcome of the experiments is a dichotomous variable (success versus failure). A meta-
analysis can be performed on studies that describe their findings in correlation
coefficients, as for example, studies of the familiar relationship of intelligence. In these
cases, the correlation itself is the indicator of the effect size. Nor is the method restricted
to situations in which one or more variables is properly referred to as "dependent." For
example, a meta-analysis could be performed on a collection of studies each of which
attempts to estimate the incidence of left- handedness in various groups of people.
Modern meta-analysis does more than just combine the effect sizes of a set of
studies. It tests if the studies' outcomes show more variation than the variation that is
expected because of sampling different research participants. If that is the case, study
characteristics such as measurement instrument used, population sampled, or aspects
of the studies' design are coded. These characteristics are then used as predictor
variables to analyze the excess variation in the effect sizes.
A weakness of the method is that sources of bias are not controlled by the
method. A good meta-analysis of badly designed studies will still result in bad

  1
 statistics. Robert Slavin has argued that only methodologically sound studies should be
included in a meta-analysis, a practice he calls 'best evidence meta-analysis'. Other meta-analysts
would include weaker studies, and add a study-level predictor variable that reflects the
methodological quality of the studies to examine the effect of study quality on the effect size.