Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

A Bayesian aggregate meta-analytic evaluation approach.

H K Suen

    Evaluation & the Health Professions
    |November 6, 1984
    PubMed
    Summary
    This summary is machine-generated.

    Related Concept Videos

    You might also read

    Related Articles

    Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

    Sort by
    Same author

    A controlled randomized response technique.

    Evaluation & the health professions·1993
    Same author

    Reappraisal of momentary time sampling and partial-interval recording.

    Journal of applied behavior analysis·1991
    Same journal

    The "Twilight Zone" Is a Danger Zone: Why the Occupational-Clinical Divide in Burnout Assessment Is a False Dichotomy.

    Evaluation & the health professions·2026
    Same journal

    Evaluating Equity in AI-Supported Functional Assessment: Agreement Between Clinician Judgment and Digital Metrics in Stroke Rehabilitation.

    Evaluation & the health professions·2026
    Same journal

    Psychometric Properties of the Arabic Version of the PROMIS Sleep Disturbance 8b Short Form Among Nurses.

    Evaluation & the health professions·2026
    Same journal

    Commentary: Systemic Inequities in Japan's Technical Intern Training Program (TITP): Health, Labor, and Legal Vulnerabilities of Foreign Trainees.

    Evaluation & the health professions·2026
    Same journal

    Application of Patient-Reported Outcome Measurements in Traditional Chinese Medicine Clinical Trials for Musculoskeletal Disorders in China: A Registry-Based Analysis.

    Evaluation & the health professions·2026
    Same journal

    Divergent Socioeconomic Pathways to Biologically Uncontrolled Diabetes by Gender: A Bayesian Analysis of NHANES 2021-2023.

    Evaluation & the health professions·2026
    See all related articles

    The Bayesian inferential process offers a more powerful and sensitive approach for aggregate meta-analysis compared to traditional methods. This statistical technique is recommended when combining evaluation results without primary data.

    Area of Science:

    • Statistics
    • Biostatistics
    • Meta-analysis

    Background:

    • Traditional meta-analysis relies on average effect sizes.
    • Limitations exist in sensitivity and consistency of traditional methods.
    • Need for robust methods to combine evaluation results, especially without primary data.

    Purpose of the Study:

    • To modify and evaluate the Bayesian inferential process for aggregate meta-analytic evaluation.
    • To compare the Bayesian approach with the traditional average effect size meta-analytic approach.
    • To assess the statistical power and consistency of the Bayesian method in meta-analysis.

    Main Methods:

    • Modification of the Bayesian inferential process for aggregate meta-analysis.
    • Comparative analysis of Bayesian and traditional average effect size meta-analytic approaches.

    Related Experiment Videos

  • Evaluation of descriptive and inferential statistics derivation within the Bayesian framework.

    • Main Results:

    • The Bayesian approach demonstrated higher sensitivity to inter-study differences compared to traditional methods.
    • The Bayesian approach yielded more consistent methods for deriving descriptive and inferential statistics.
    • The Bayesian approach proved statistically more powerful due to its ability to incorporate all available information.

    Conclusions:

    • The Bayesian inferential process is a superior approach for aggregate meta-analysis.
    • Recommended for combining evaluation results when primary data are unavailable.
    • Particularly suitable for meta-analyses involving comparisons of two independent samples.