Zero-cell corrections in random-effects meta-analyses

Frank Weber, Guido Knapp, Katja Ickstadt, Günther Kundt and Anne Glass

No qjh5f, OSF Preprints from Center for Open Science

Abstract: The standard estimator for the log odds ratio (the unconditional maximum likelihood estimator) and the delta-method estimator for its standard error are not defined if the corresponding 2x2 table contains at least one "zero cell". This is also an issue when estimating the overall log odds ratio in a meta-analysis. It is well known that correcting for zero cells by adding a small increment should be avoided. Nevertheless, these zero-cell corrections continue to be used. With this article, we want to warn of a particularly bad zero-cell correction. For this, we conduct a simulation study comparing the following two zero-cell corrections under the ordinary random-effects model: (i) adding 1/2 to all cells of all the individual studies' 2x2 tables independently of any zero-cell occurrences and (ii) adding 1/2 to all cells of only those 2x2 tables containing at least one zero cell. The main finding is that correction (i) performs worse than correction (ii). Thus, we strongly discourage the use of correction (i).

Date: 2020-03-16
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (2)

Downloads: (external link)
https://osf.io/download/5e6f43380cd06c03720029b5/

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:osf:osfxxx:qjh5f

DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/qjh5f

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in OSF Preprints from Center for Open Science
Bibliographic data for series maintained by OSF ().