Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 5, 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
Controversy and debate on credibility ceilings. Paper 1: Fundamental problems with the "credibility ceiling" method
Maya B Mathur1, Tyler J VanderWeele2
1Quantitative Sciences Unit, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Background And Objectives:
The "credibility ceiling" method was proposed to conduct sensitivity analysis for unmeasured confounding and other forms of bias in meta-analyses and has been used in umbrella reviews to grade evidence strength. However, we explain that the method has fundamental statistical flaws.
Methods:
We use statistical reasoning to assess the method's validity, providing intuition for our findings by presenting simple applied examples in which the method yields clearly incorrect conclusions.
Results:
The credibility ceiling is not a valid bias correction, as we show mathematically and illustrate using examples in which, for example, the method incorrectly "adjusts" the meta-analytic point estimate in the wrong direction. Although the originators describe the method as limiting the credibility of any given observational study to a fixed ceiling, we show why this interpretation in fact bears little relation to what the method actually does.
Conclusion:
Given the fundamental problems with the credibility ceiling method and its demonstrated potential for misleading conclusions, we recommend against its use.
More Related Videos
08:27Applying an eMASS Customization Program as a Research Tool to Evaluate Consumer Benefits
Published on: September 27, 2019
08:24The Joint Effect of Social Comparison and Social Distance on Evaluation of Intertemporal Choice Outcomes in Event-related Potential Studies
Published on: August 25, 2023
Related Concept Videos
Self-Presentation: Self-Monitoring and Self-Handicapping
Accuracy and Errors in Hypothesis Testing
In hypothesis testing, the probability of making a Type I error, denoted as α, is commonly set at 0.05. This significance level indicates a 5% chance...
Criteria for Causality: Bradford Hill Criteria - II
Bias in Epidemiological Studies
Theory of Attribution II: Kelley's Covariation Theory
Halo Effect