Protocol: Machine learning for selecting moderators in meta-analysis: A systematic review of methods and their applications, and an evaluation using data on tutoring interventions

IF 4 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY Campbell Systematic Reviews Pub Date : 2024-12-10 DOI:10.1002/cl2.70009
Jens Dietrichson, Rasmus Klokker, Trine Filges, Elizabeth Bengtsen, Therese D. Pigott
{"title":"Protocol: Machine learning for selecting moderators in meta-analysis: A systematic review of methods and their applications, and an evaluation using data on tutoring interventions","authors":"Jens Dietrichson,&nbsp;Rasmus Klokker,&nbsp;Trine Filges,&nbsp;Elizabeth Bengtsen,&nbsp;Therese D. Pigott","doi":"10.1002/cl2.70009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objectives</h3>\n \n <p>This is the protocol for a Campbell systematic review. The objectives are as follows: The first objective is to find and describe machine and statistical learning (ML) methods designed for moderator meta-analysis. The second objective is to find and describe applications of such ML methods in moderator meta-analyses of health, medical, and social science interventions. These two parts of the meta-review will primarily involve a systematic review and will be conducted according to guidelines specified by the Campbell Collaboration (MECCIR guidelines). The outcomes will be a list of ML methods that are designed for moderator meta-analysis (first objective), and a description of how (some of) these methods have been applied in the health, medical, and social sciences (second objective). The third objective is to examine how the ML methods identified in the meta-review can help researchers formulate new hypotheses or select among existing ones, and compare the identified methods to one another and to regular meta-regression methods for moderator analysis. To compare the performance of different moderator meta-analysis methods, we will apply the methods to data on tutoring interventions from two systematic reviews of interventions to improve academic achievement for students with or at risk-of academic difficulties, and to an independent test sample of tutoring studies published after the search period in the two reviews.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":"20 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11632158/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cl2.70009","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives

This is the protocol for a Campbell systematic review. The objectives are as follows: The first objective is to find and describe machine and statistical learning (ML) methods designed for moderator meta-analysis. The second objective is to find and describe applications of such ML methods in moderator meta-analyses of health, medical, and social science interventions. These two parts of the meta-review will primarily involve a systematic review and will be conducted according to guidelines specified by the Campbell Collaboration (MECCIR guidelines). The outcomes will be a list of ML methods that are designed for moderator meta-analysis (first objective), and a description of how (some of) these methods have been applied in the health, medical, and social sciences (second objective). The third objective is to examine how the ML methods identified in the meta-review can help researchers formulate new hypotheses or select among existing ones, and compare the identified methods to one another and to regular meta-regression methods for moderator analysis. To compare the performance of different moderator meta-analysis methods, we will apply the methods to data on tutoring interventions from two systematic reviews of interventions to improve academic achievement for students with or at risk-of academic difficulties, and to an independent test sample of tutoring studies published after the search period in the two reviews.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
协议:在荟萃分析中选择调节者的机器学习:对方法及其应用的系统回顾,以及使用辅导干预数据的评估。
这是坎贝尔系统评价的方案。目标如下:第一个目标是找到并描述为调节元分析设计的机器和统计学习(ML)方法。第二个目标是找到并描述这种机器学习方法在健康、医学和社会科学干预的调节元分析中的应用。meta-综述的这两个部分将主要涉及系统评价,并将根据Campbell协作(MECCIR指南)指定的指南进行。结果将是为调节元分析设计的ML方法列表(第一个目标),并描述这些方法(其中一些)如何在健康、医学和社会科学中应用(第二个目标)。第三个目标是研究meta综述中确定的ML方法如何帮助研究人员制定新的假设或在现有的假设中进行选择,并将确定的方法相互比较,并将其与常规的meta回归方法进行比较,以进行调节分析。为了比较不同调节元分析方法的表现,我们将把这些方法应用于来自两项干预措施的数据,这些干预措施旨在提高有或有学习困难风险的学生的学业成绩,并应用于两项综述中搜索期后发表的辅导研究的独立测试样本。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Campbell Systematic Reviews
Campbell Systematic Reviews Social Sciences-Social Sciences (all)
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
21.90%
发文量
80
审稿时长
6 weeks
期刊最新文献
Critical appraisal of methodological quality and completeness of reporting in Chinese social science systematic reviews with meta-analysis: A systematic review. The effectiveness of psychosocial interventions for reducing problematic substance use, mental ill health, and housing instability in people experiencing homelessness in high income countries: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Exposure to hate in online and traditional media: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the impact of this exposure on individuals and communities. PROTOCOL: Non-criminal justice interventions for countering cognitive and behavioural radicalisation amongst children and adolescents: A systematic review of effectiveness and implementation. Protocol: The impact of integrated thematic instruction model on primary and secondary school students compared to standard teaching: A protocol of systematic review.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1