Hi
The meta forestplot using random(ebayes) appears to produce a different value for the I2 result compared to the output for meta summarize using the same method. Using different methods (fixed dlaird etc) produces the same I2 in the meta summarize and forestplot but not when using random(ebayes).
Is the an issue with the meta forestplot?
Thanks
Related Posts with Different I-square results for meta summarize and meta forestplot using random empirical Bayes method
Invalid syntax error after using args commandI am in the process of replicating the Stata code of some researchers. The code snippet below is fro…
nana …
Help with Master Thesis | Fixed EffectsDear forum, I have a urgent question. I am writing my thesis about cross-border M&A. Hence, I u…
Whether saving the do file when STATA is running affects STATA performance?I am quite new to STATA. I am running a set of code. At the same time, I also fixed some code in oth…
Line break in coding returns me with error message after using Rcall packageCode: rcall: out1 <- att_gt(yname="ln_incwage", tname="year", gname="treat_1", xformla=~male + a…
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
0 Response to Different I-square results for meta summarize and meta forestplot using random empirical Bayes method
Post a Comment