META ANALİZ YAZILIMLARININ KARŞILAŞTIRILMASINA İLİŞKİN BİR TARAMA ÇALIŞMASI

Abstract

A Survey Study for The Comparison of Meta-Analysis Softwares

Abstract

In recent years, meta-analysis studies have become a popular field of study in order to quantitatively analyze the results obtained from more than one study carried out independently from the same subject and to interpret the results from a holistic perspective. Because of this, different licensed and open source software has been developed in the last 20 years. With this study, it is aimed to compare the existing programs and software in terms of meta-analysis in terms of quantitative and qualitative aspects. For this purpose, the results obtained from Jamovi, CMA, RStudio and Meta-Essentials programs were compared within the determined criterias. As a result of filtering the 1906 studies obtained from databases in accordance with the flow diagram, the number of studies to be included in the meta-analysis was determined to be 32. As a result of the study, forest plots obtained from different programs do not differ according to the program used. In addition, the open source and free of R, Jamovi and Meta-Essentials programs have been determined as the superiority of the programs compared to CMA. According to the findings, Jamovi has much more test for heterogeneity compaired to the other softwares. At the same time, the number of model prediction options is much higher for Jamovi compared to Meta-Essentials and CMA. While other software does not provide any information regarding model fit index and information criterion, Jamovi offers a rich output in this regard. It can be said that these features make Jamovi advantageous over other software.

Keywords

• Meta-AnalysiS
• RStudio
• Jamovi

References

1. Eysenck, H. J. (1994). Meta-analysis and its problems. Bmj, 309,789-792.
2. Hunt, M. (1997). Making order of scientific chaos. In How Science Takes Stock New York, Russel Sage Foundation; 1-19.
3. Bax, L, Yu, L. M, Ikeda, N., Moons, GM. K. (2007). A systematic comparison of software dedicated to meta-analysis of causal studies [electronic article], BMC Med Res Methodol , vol. 7 pg. 40
4. Normand, S. L. T. (1995). Meta-analysis software - a comparative review-DSTAT, version 1.10. Am Statistician 1995, 49, 298-309.
5. Hedges, L. V., & Olkin, I. (1985). Statistical methods for meta-analysis. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
6. Pearson, K. (1904). "Report on Certain Enteric Fever Inoculation Statis- tics," British Medical Journal, 3, 1243-1246
7. Birge, R. T. (1932). The calculation of errors by the method of least squares. Physical Review, 16, 1-32.
8. Egger, M., Davey Smith, G. (1997). Meta-analysis: Potentials and promise. British Medical Journal, 315(7119), 1371-1374.

9. Egger, M., Davey Smith, G. (1998). Bias in location and selection of studies. British Medical Journal, 316(7124), 61-66.
10. Freiman, J. A., Chalmers, T. C., Smith, H., Kuebler, R. R. (1992). The importance of beta, the type II error, and sample size in the design and interpretation of the randomized controlled trial. In Bailar, J. C., Mosteller, F. (Eds.), Medical uses of statistics. (357-373) Boston, MA: NEJM Books.
11. Fagard, R., Staessen, J., Thijs, L. (1996). Advantages and disadvantages of the meta-analysis approach. Journal of hypertension. Official journal of the International Society of Hypertension. 14. S9-12.
12. Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P. T., Rothstein, H. R. (2009). Introduction to meta-analysis. West Sussex, UK: Wiley.
13. Harrer, M., Cuijpers, P., Furukawa, T.A, & Ebert, D. D. (2019). Doing Meta-Analysis in R: A Hands-on Guide. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.2551803.
14. Lipsey, M. W., David, B. W. (2001). Practical Meta-Analysis. Sage Publications, Inc.
15. Pigott, T. (2012). Advances in Meta-Analysis. Springer.
16. Egger, M., Davey Smith., G., Phillips, A. N. (1997). Meta-analysis: Principles and Procedures. British Medical Journal, 315(7121), 1533-1537. Fraenkel, Jack R. And Norman E. Wallen. (2009). How to Design and Evaluate Research in Education. New York. McGraw-Hill Companies.
17. Karasar, N. (2012). Bilimsel Araştırma Yöntemi. Ankara: Bilim Kitap Kırtasiye Yayınevi.
18. The jamovi project (2019). jamovi (Version 0.9) [Computer Software]. Retrieved from https://www.jamovi.org
19. The PRISMA Group (2009). Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement. PLoS Med 6(7): e1000097. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed1000097.
20. Mchugh, M. L. (2012). Interrater reliability: the kappa statistic Importance of measuring interrater reliability. Biochemia Medica, 22(3), 276–282.
21. Leary, H. M. (2012). Self-directed learning in problem-based learning versus traditional lecture-based learning: A meta-analysis. All Graduate Theses and Dissertations. http://digitalcommons.usu.edu/etd/1173 adresinden erişildi.
22. Rudy, A. C. (2001). A Meta-analysis of the treatment of anorexia nervosa (Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi). Ithaca College, ABD.
23. Suurmond R, van Rhee, H, Hak T. (2017). Introduction, comparison and validation of Meta-Essentials: A free and simple tool for meta-analysis. Research Synthesis Methods. Vol. 8, Iss 4, 537-553. https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1260.
24. *Halder, U. K. (2018). English Language Anxiety and Academic Achievement. North Asian International Research Journal of Social Science & Humanities. Vol: 4, Issue: 3. Pages: 138-147.
25. *Mahfouz Abdelsattar Abuelfadl, Anxiety as a Predictor of Academic Achievement of Students with Learning Difficulties, International Journal of Psychology and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 5 No. 4, 2015, pp. 169-177. doi: 10.5923/j.ijpbs.20150504.05.
26. *Dordinejad, F. Gh. & Ahmadabad, R. M. (2014). Examination of the relationship between foreign language classroom anxiety and English achievement among male and female Iranian high school students. International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World, 6(4), 446-460.
27. *Awan, R.; Azher, M.; Anwar, M. N., and Naz, A. (2010). An investigation of foreign language classroom anxiety and its relationship with students' achievement. Journal of College Teaching & Learning, 7(11), 33-40.
28. *Ghorban Dordinejad, F., & Farjad Nasab, A. H. (2013). Examination of the Relationship between Perfectionism and English Achievement as Mediated by Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety. Asia Pacific Education Review, 14, 603-614.
29. *Amiri, M., & Ghonsooly, B. (2016). The Relationship between English Learning Anxiety and the Students' Achievement on Examinations. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, Vol. 6, No. 4, pp. 855-865.
30. *Salehi, M. & Marefat, F. (2014). The Effects of Foreign Language Anxiety and Test Anxiety on Foreign Language Test Performance. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, Vol. 4, No. 5, pp. 931-940.
31. *Anyadubalu, Christopher C. (2010). “Self-Efficacy, Anxiety, and Performance in the English Language among Middle- School Students in English Language Program in Satri Si Suriyothai School, Bangkok”. International Journal of Human and Social Sciences, 5(3), 193-198.
32. *Zheng, Y. (2010). Chinese university students' motivation, anxiety, global awareness, linguistic confidence, and English test performance: a correlational and causal investigation. Queen’s University, Faculty of Education, Doctoral Thesis, 288pp.
33. *Lan, Yi-Ting, J. (2010). A Study of Taiwanese 7th Graders Foreign Language Anxiety, Beliefs about Language Learning and Its Relationship with Their English Achievement. Master’s thesis, Ming Chuan University.
34. * Yao, W., & Jingna, L. (2011). The Interference of Foreign Language Anxiety in the Reading Comprehension of Agricultural Engineering Students. IEEE, 660-663.
35. *Hewitt, E., & Stephenson, J. (2011). Foreign Language Anxiety and Oral Exam Performance: A Replication of Phillips’s MLJ Study. The Modern Language Journal, 96(2). http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2011.01174.x
36. * Szyszka, M. (2011). Foreign Language Anxiety and Self-perceived English Pronounciation Competence. Studies in second Language Learning and Teaching, 1(2), 283-300.
37. * Lu, Z., & Liu, M. (2011). Foreign language Anxiety and Strategy Use; A Study with Chinese Undergraduate EFL Learners. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 2(6), 1298-1305. http://dx.doi.org/10.4303/jltr.2.6.1298-1305.
38. *Atasheneh, N., & Izadi, A. (2012). The Role of Teachers in Reducing-Increasing Listening Comprehension Test Anxiety; A Case of Iranian EFL Learners. English language Teaching, 5(3), 178-187. http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/elt.v5n3p178
39. *Serraj, S. & Noordin, bt. N. (2013). Relationship among Iranian EFL Students’ Foreign Language Anxiety, Foreign Language Listening and Their Listening Comprehension. English Language Teaching; Vol. 6, No. 5.
40. *Golchi, M. M. (2012). Listening anxiety and its relationship with listening strategy use and listening comprehension among Iranian IELTS learners. International Journal of English Linguistics, 2(4), 115.
41. *Teimouri, Y., Goetze, J., Plonsky, L. (2019). Second Language Anxiety And Achievement: A Meta-Analysis–Erratum. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, Vol. 41, Issue. 2, p. 489.
42. *Corchero, R. M. (2017). The Effect of Foreign Language Anxiety on Students’ Attainment: A Study of Secondary Education Students Learning Spanish in the UK. Master Thesis, Education Faculty, University of Extremadura.
43. *Liu, M. & Xiangming, L. (2019). Changes in and Effects of Anxiety on English Test Performance in Chinese Postgraduate EFL Classrooms. Education Research International, vol. 2019, Article ID 7213925, 11 pages. https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/7213925.
44. *Tsai, Ya-Chin & Li, Y,-Chih (2012). Test Anxiety and Foreign Language Reading Anxiety in a Reading-Proficiency Test. Journal of Social Sciences, 8(1), 95-103.
45. *Gerencheal, B. (2016). Gender differences in foreign language anxiety at an Ethiopian university: Mizan-tepi university third year english major students in focus. African Journal of Education and Practice, 1(1), 1-16.