TY - JOUR
T1 - Assessing 'what works' in international development: Meta-analysis for sophisticated dummies
AU - Duvendack, Maren
AU - Hombrados, Jorge Garcia
AU - Palmer-Jones, Richard
AU - Waddington, Hugh
PY - 2012
Y1 - 2012
N2 - Many studies of development interventions are individually unable to provide convincing conclusions because of low statistical significance, small size, limited geographical purview and so forth. Systematic reviews and meta-analysis are forms of research synthesis that combine studies of adequate methodological quality to produce more convincing conclusions. In the social sciences, study designs, types of analysis and methodological quality vary tremendously. Combining these studies for meta-analysis entails more demanding risk of bias assessments to ensure that only studies with largely appropriate methodological characteristics are included, and sensitivity analysis should be performed. In this article, we discuss assessing risk of bias and meta-analysis using such diverse studies.
AB - Many studies of development interventions are individually unable to provide convincing conclusions because of low statistical significance, small size, limited geographical purview and so forth. Systematic reviews and meta-analysis are forms of research synthesis that combine studies of adequate methodological quality to produce more convincing conclusions. In the social sciences, study designs, types of analysis and methodological quality vary tremendously. Combining these studies for meta-analysis entails more demanding risk of bias assessments to ensure that only studies with largely appropriate methodological characteristics are included, and sensitivity analysis should be performed. In this article, we discuss assessing risk of bias and meta-analysis using such diverse studies.
U2 - 10.1080/19439342.2012.710642
DO - 10.1080/19439342.2012.710642
M3 - Article
VL - 4
SP - 456
EP - 471
JO - Journal of Development Effectiveness
JF - Journal of Development Effectiveness
SN - 1943-9342
IS - 3
ER -