You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Following on from #68 to find a long-term optimal method for estimating corr/dependencies in datasets.
MetaLab script's current method for imputing missing corr values is to randomly select from other existing values in the dataset (perhaps limited to the same method/similar age). In langdiscrim we imputed from a normal distribution using the median and variance of existing corr values and then adjusting the range to [-1,1]. Rabagliati et al. (2018) imputed it as the mean weighted by sample size.
We will work on a short report (/paper in the long run) where we review the literature for other methods, then compare the methods for the site, then decide on the best option
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
One option to consider is Robust Variance Estimation which uses the package clubSandwich alongside rma.mv in metafor to develop a working model based on an estimate of variance. Need to look further into this to see if it could be integrated with MetaLab's approach of estimating corr before calculating effect sizes
Thanks @christinabergmann! Okay, reading through these I see that I misunderstood 'dependencies' as it relates to Robust Variance Estimation to relate to the corr column when it actually relates to random effects structure! I will just transfer the Issue you tagged from metalab2 to the metalab repo so it's still on our radar
Following on from #68 to find a long-term optimal method for estimating corr/dependencies in datasets.
MetaLab script's current method for imputing missing corr values is to randomly select from other existing values in the dataset (perhaps limited to the same method/similar age). In langdiscrim we imputed from a normal distribution using the median and variance of existing corr values and then adjusting the range to [-1,1]. Rabagliati et al. (2018) imputed it as the mean weighted by sample size.
We will work on a short report (/paper in the long run) where we review the literature for other methods, then compare the methods for the site, then decide on the best option
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: