Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 28, 2026

Meta-analysis of Voxel-Based Neuroimaging Studies using Seed-based d Mapping with Permutation of Subject Images (SDM-PSI)
Published on: November 27, 2019
Original metric vs. standardized effect sizes for meta-analysis of clinical data
1Meta-Analytic Research Group, Clinical Investigation Program, MGH Institute of Health Professions, Boston, MA.
Abstract:
This study compared the use of the original metric effect size with the standardized effect size for clinical data in meta-analysis. The example data set included 17 controlled clinical trials dealing with the effects of progressive resistance exercise on resting diastolic blood pressure in adults. Original metric effect size showed a decrease in resting diastolic blood pressure of -2.07 mm Hg (95% confidence interval, -3.60 to -0.54). From a clinical standpoint, this is considered a "small" effect. The standardized approach showed an average effect of -0.21, 95% CI= -0.39 to -0.02. This is also considered a "smal" effect. When possible, use of the original metric is preferred because it can be more clinically meaningful and will enhance interpretation of blood pressure results for a wider range of readers. (c) 2001 by CHF, Inc
Related Concept Videos
Regression Toward the Mean
Multiple Comparison Tests
It would be easy to compare two samples using a significance alpha level of 0.05. In other words, there is only one sample pair to be compared. However, it would be difficult to identify a significantly different sample if the number...
Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast, controlled...
Bioequivalence Experimental Study Designs: Repeated Measures, Cross-Over, Carry-Over, and Latin Square Designs
Bioequivalence Data: Statistical Interpretation
The Mantel-Cox Log-Rank Test
