» Articles » PMID: 39294795

Quantitative Evidence Synthesis: a Practical Guide on Meta-analysis, Meta-regression, and Publication Bias Tests for Environmental Sciences

Overview
Journal Environ Evid
Publisher Biomed Central
Date 2024 Sep 18
PMID 39294795
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Meta-analysis is a quantitative way of synthesizing results from multiple studies to obtain reliable evidence of an intervention or phenomenon. Indeed, an increasing number of meta-analyses are conducted in environmental sciences, and resulting meta-analytic evidence is often used in environmental policies and decision-making. We conducted a survey of recent meta-analyses in environmental sciences and found poor standards of current meta-analytic practice and reporting. For example, only ~ 40% of the 73 reviewed meta-analyses reported heterogeneity (variation among effect sizes beyond sampling error), and publication bias was assessed in fewer than half. Furthermore, although almost all the meta-analyses had multiple effect sizes originating from the same studies, non-independence among effect sizes was considered in only half of the meta-analyses. To improve the implementation of meta-analysis in environmental sciences, we here outline practical guidance for conducting a meta-analysis in environmental sciences. We describe the key concepts of effect size and meta-analysis and detail procedures for fitting multilevel meta-analysis and meta-regression models and performing associated publication bias tests. We demonstrate a clear need for environmental scientists to embrace multilevel meta-analytic models, which explicitly model dependence among effect sizes, rather than the commonly used random-effects models. Further, we discuss how reporting and visual presentations of meta-analytic results can be much improved by following reporting guidelines such as PRISMA-EcoEvo (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses for Ecology and Evolutionary Biology). This paper, along with the accompanying online tutorial, serves as a practical guide on conducting a complete set of meta-analytic procedures (i.e., meta-analysis, heterogeneity quantification, meta-regression, publication bias tests and sensitivity analysis) and also as a gateway to more advanced, yet appropriate, methods.

Citing Articles

Fixed-effect versus random-effect model in meta-analysis: How to decide?.

Maitra S Indian J Anaesth. 2025; 69(1):143-146.

PMID: 40046706 PMC: 11878354. DOI: 10.4103/ija.ija_1203_24.


Pesticides have negative effects on non-target organisms.

Wan N, Fu L, Dainese M, Kiaer L, Hu Y, Xin F Nat Commun. 2025; 16(1):1360.

PMID: 39948065 PMC: 11825942. DOI: 10.1038/s41467-025-56732-x.


Same data, different analysts: variation in effect sizes due to analytical decisions in ecology and evolutionary biology.

Gould E, Fraser H, Parker T, Nakagawa S, Griffith S, Vesk P BMC Biol. 2025; 23(1):35.

PMID: 39915771 PMC: 11804095. DOI: 10.1186/s12915-024-02101-x.


Global meta-analysis shows action is needed to halt genetic diversity loss.

Shaw R, Farquharson K, Bruford M, Coates D, Elliott C, Mergeay J Nature. 2025; 638(8051):704-710.

PMID: 39880948 PMC: 11839457. DOI: 10.1038/s41586-024-08458-x.


Effects of converting cropland to grassland on greenhouse gas emissions from peat and organic-rich soils in temperate and boreal climates: a systematic review.

Holzknecht A, Land M, Dessureault-Rompre J, Elsgaard L, Lang K, Berglund O Environ Evid. 2025; 14(1):1.

PMID: 39828798 PMC: 11743012. DOI: 10.1186/s13750-024-00354-1.


References
1.
Nakagawa S, Freckleton R . Missing inaction: the dangers of ignoring missing data. Trends Ecol Evol. 2008; 23(11):592-6. DOI: 10.1016/j.tree.2008.06.014. View

2.
Hudson L, Newbold T, Contu S, Hill S, Lysenko I, De Palma A . The database of the PREDICTS (Projecting Responses of Ecological Diversity In Changing Terrestrial Systems) project. Ecol Evol. 2017; 7(1):145-188. PMC: 5215197. DOI: 10.1002/ece3.2579. View

3.
Gurevitch J, Morrison J, Hedges L . The Interaction between Competition and Predation: A Meta-analysis of Field Experiments. Am Nat. 2001; 155(4):435-453. DOI: 10.1086/303337. View

4.
Kossmeier M, Tran U, Voracek M . Charting the landscape of graphical displays for meta-analysis and systematic reviews: a comprehensive review, taxonomy, and feature analysis. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2020; 20(1):26. PMC: 7006175. DOI: 10.1186/s12874-020-0911-9. View

5.
Raue A, Kreutz C, Maiwald T, Bachmann J, Schilling M, Klingmuller U . Structural and practical identifiability analysis of partially observed dynamical models by exploiting the profile likelihood. Bioinformatics. 2009; 25(15):1923-9. DOI: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btp358. View