Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/331380 
Year of Publication: 
2025
Series/Report no.: 
Tinbergen Institute Discussion Paper No. TI 2025-048/III
Publisher: 
Tinbergen Institute, Amsterdam and Rotterdam
Abstract: 
Given several studies (inputs) of some phenomenon of interest, each input presents an estimate of a key parameter with an associated estimated precision. The random-effects model used in meta-analysis estimates this parameter based on a decomposition of the error term into within-input noise and across-input noise. Our interest is in the precision of this estimator, which leads to a confidence interval of the parameter. But we shall also be interested in the precision when we transform the inputs into one input, which leads to a (much wider) prediction interval. We review and extend the meta-analysis framework in a maximum-likelihood context, paying special attention to conflict between the inputs, correlation between the inputs, and the difference between confidence and prediction intervals and the corresponding notions of precision. We illustrate our approach with two meta-analyses from the world of clinical trials and finance.
Subjects: 
Conflicting evidence
confidence interval
prediction interval
information aggregation
meta-analysis
random-effects model
nonstandard errors
JEL: 
C13
C53
C83
G10
I19
Document Type: 
Working Paper

Files in This Item:
File
Size





Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.