Closed elmacartney closed 3 years ago
@elmacartney - I have done it
A new function is in Functions_cleanedup.R
Also, I changed RMD file so we now get the correct effect sizes.
I did find another mistakes (my original ones which I got you to check) so it it probably best we go through it together and I will also ask how you actually check the values last time.
Please check these and see whether it makes sense.
Also, actually pairwise analyses may become significant (this is I had a mistake) - although generally - this has less power than the main effect but each of these is probably more powerful than interaction (interaction actually turns out least powerful - as estimating this a bit more complicated - they say we need 16 times more sample size to estimate interaction correctly - a perfect for meta-analysis - please bring this up next time we need - I want you to understand this). Maybe we can quickly catch up once you rerun the analyses.
@itchyshin just letting you know that I've rerun everything and results are pretty much consistent, including the interaction. Like you said, pairwise comparisons are now significant (apart from ES/EC) and heterogeneity has gone up substantially.
We can discuss more on Monday.
@elmacartney - thanks for an update - I will update a method section with regard to power a bit soon!
@itchyshin there is now a column in the data called "Response_percent" where yes = percent.
Can you please add the function that transforms these and add how this was done in the methods?
Thanks!