Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 30, 2026

Author Spotlight: Evaluating the Adjuvant Efficacy and Safety of Angong Niuhuang Pill in Viral Encephalitis Treatment
Published on: April 19, 2024
Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman approach and its modification for random-effects meta-analysis with few studies
Christian Röver1, Guido Knapp2, Tim Friede3
1Department of Medical Statistics, University Medical Center Göttingen, Humboldtallee 32, Göttingen, 37073, Germany. christian.roever@med.uni-goettingen.de.
Background:
Random-effects meta-analysis is commonly performed by first deriving an estimate of the between-study variation, the heterogeneity, and subsequently using this as the basis for combining results, i.e., for estimating the effect, the figure of primary interest. The heterogeneity variance estimate however is commonly associated with substantial uncertainty, especially in contexts where there are only few studies available, such as in small populations and rare diseases.
Methods:
Confidence intervals and tests for the effect may be constructed via a simple normal approximation, or via a Student-t distribution, using the Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman (HKSJ) approach, which additionally uses a refined estimator of variance of the effect estimator. The modified Knapp-Hartung method (mKH) applies an ad hoc correction and has been proposed to prevent counterintuitive effects and to yield more conservative inference. We performed a simulation study to investigate the behaviour of the standard HKSJ and modified mKH procedures in a range of circumstances, with a focus on the common case of meta-analysis based on only a few studies.
Results:
The standard HKSJ procedure works well when the treatment effect estimates to be combined are of comparable precision, but nominal error levels are exceeded when standard errors vary considerably between studies (e.g. due to variations in study size). Application of the modification on the other hand yields more conservative results with error rates closer to the nominal level. Differences are most pronounced in the common case of few studies of varying size or precision.
Conclusions:
Use of the modified mKH procedure is recommended, especially when only a few studies contribute to the meta-analysis and the involved studies' precisions (standard errors) vary.
Related Concept Videos
Randomized Experiments
Simple randomization
Simple...
Friedman Two-way Analysis of Variance by Ranks
Mechanistic Models: Compartment Models in Individual and Population Analysis
Regression Toward the Mean
Bias in Epidemiological Studies
One-Compartment Open Model: Wagner-Nelson and Loo Riegelman Method for ka Estimation
On...
