Abstract

There are two popular statistical models for meta-analysis, the fixed-effect model and the random-effects model. The fact that these two models employ similar sets of formulas to compute statistics, and sometimes yield similar estimates for the various parameters, may lead people to believe that the models are interchangeable. In fact, though, the models represent fundamentally different assumptions about the data. The selection of the appropriate model is important to ensure that the various statistics are estimated correctly. Additionally, and more fundamentally, the model serves to place the analysis in context. It provides a framework for the goals of the analysis as well as for the interpretation of the statistics. In this paper we explain the key assumptions of each model, and then outline the differences between the models. We conclude with a discussion of factors to consider when choosing between the two models. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Keywords

Computer scienceModel selectionRandom effects modelContext (archaeology)EconometricsMeta-analysisFixed effects modelStatistical modelSelection (genetic algorithm)Interpretation (philosophy)StatisticsMathematicsArtificial intelligencePanel data

Affiliated Institutions

Related Publications

Publication Info

Year
2010
Type
article
Volume
1
Issue
2
Pages
97-111
Citations
6217
Access
Closed

External Links

View on DOI.org

Social Impact

Altmetric
PlumX Metrics

Social media, news, blog, policy document mentions

Citation Metrics

6217
OpenAlex

Cite This

Michael Borenstein, Larry V. Hedges, Julian P. T. Higgins et al. (2010). A basic introduction to fixed-effect and random-effects models for meta-analysis. Research Synthesis Methods , 1 (2) , 97-111. https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.12

Identifiers

DOI
10.1002/jrsm.12