ArticleSociological methods & research2022
Meta-Analysis in Sociological Research: Power and Heterogeneity.
Article in Sociological methods & research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The expectancy-value theory: A meta-analysis of its application in physical education.Journal of sport and health science · 2023Pooled it
- Global insights into healthcare providers' knowledge, attitudes, practices, and concerns on pre-exposure prophylaxis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Preventive medicine reports · 2025Review
- Meta-Analysis of the Impact of Far-Red Light on Vegetable Crop Growth and Quality.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Effect of physical activity for reducing anxiety symptoms in older adults: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation · 2024Article
- The life-course association of birth-weight genes with self-rated health.Biodemography and social biologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Meta-analysis is a statistical method that combines quantitative findings from previous studies. It has been increasingly used to obtain more credible results in a wide range of scientific fields. Combining the results of relevant studies allows researchers to leverage study similarities while modeling potential sources of between-study heterogeneity. This paper provides a review of the core methodologies of meta-analysis that we consider most relevant to sociological research. After developing the foundation of the fixed-effects and random-effects models of meta-analysis, this paper illustrates the utility of the method with regression coefficients reported from two sets of social science studies. We explain the various steps of the process including constructing the meta-sample from primary studies; estimating the fixed- and random-effects models; analyzing the source of heterogeneity across studies; assessing publication bias. We conclude with a discussion of steps that could be taken to strengthen the development of meta-analysis in sociological research, which will eventually increase the credibility of sociological inquiry via a knowledge-cumulative process.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.