scholarly journals Changes of Ankle Dorsiflexion Using Compression Tissue Flossing: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  
Devin S. Kielur ◽  
Cameron J. Powden
Keyword(s):  
Confidence Interval ◽  
Range Of Motion ◽  
Effect Size ◽  
Evidence Synthesis ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Effect Sizes ◽  
Lower Extremity Injury ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Physically Active ◽  
Evidence Database

Context: Impaired dorsiflexion range of motion (DFROM) has been established as a predictor of lower-extremity injury. Compression tissue flossing (CTF) may address tissue restrictions associated with impaired DFROM; however, a consensus is yet to support these effects. Objectives: To summarize the available literature regarding CTF on DFROM in physically active individuals. Evidence Acquisition: PubMed and EBSCOhost (CINAHL, MEDLINE, and SPORTDiscus) were searched from 1965 to July 2019 for related articles using combination terms related to CTF and DRFOM. Articles were included if they measured the immediate effects of CTF on DFROM. Methodological quality was assessed using the Physiotherapy Evidence Database scale. The level of evidence was assessed using the Strength of Recommendation Taxonomy. The magnitude of CTF effects from pre-CTF to post-CTF and compared with a control of range of motion activities only were examined using Hedges g effect sizes and 95% confidence intervals. Randomeffects meta-analysis was performed to synthesize DFROM changes. Evidence Synthesis: A total of 6 studies were included in the analysis. The average Physiotherapy Evidence Database score was 60% (range = 30%–80%) with 4 out of 6 studies considered high quality and 2 as low quality. Meta-analysis indicated no DFROM improvements for CTF compared with range of motion activities only (effect size = 0.124; 95% confidence interval, −0.137 to 0.384; P = .352) and moderate improvements from pre-CTF to post-CTF (effect size = 0.455; 95% confidence interval, 0.022 to 0.889; P = .040). Conclusions: There is grade B evidence to suggest CTF may have no effect on DFROM when compared with a control of range of motion activities only and results in moderate improvements from pre-CTF to post-CTF. This suggests that DFROM improvements were most likely due to exercises completed rather than the band application.

Theory of Estimation and Testing of Effect Sizes: Use in Meta-Analysis

1983 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 93-101 ◽  
Author(s):  
Helena Chmura Kraemer
Keyword(s):  
Confidence Interval ◽  
Effect Size ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Single Sample ◽  
Effect Sizes ◽  
Statistical Procedures

Approximations to the distribution of a common form of effect size are presented. Single sample tests, confidence interval formulation, tests of homogeneity and pooling procedures are based on these approximations. Caveats are presented concerning statistical procedures as applied to sample effect sizes commonly used in meta-analysis.

scholarly journals Effects of Dance on Pain in Patients with Fibromyalgia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2018 ◽  
Vol 2018 ◽  
pp. 1-16 ◽  
Author(s):  
Álvaro Murillo-García ◽  
Santos Villafaina ◽  
José C. Adsuar ◽  
Narcis Gusi ◽  
Daniel Collado-Mateo
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Effect Size ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Extraction Process ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Evidence Database ◽  
The Cochrane Library

Objective. The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review on the effectiveness of dance-based programs in patients with fibromyalgia, as well as calculate the overall effect size of the improvements, through a meta-analysis. Methods. The Cochrane Library, Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro), PubMed, TRIP, and Web of Science (WOS) were selected to identify the articles included in this systematic review and meta-analysis. A total of seven articles fulfilled all inclusion and exclusion criteria. PRISMA guidelines were followed in the data extraction process. The level of evidence was established following guidelines from the Dutch Institute for Healthcare Improvement (CBO). Results. The studies were all randomized controlled trials, but not double-blind. Duration of dance programs ranged from 12 to 24 weeks. Sessions lasted between 60 and 120 minutes and were performed 1-2 times per week. The overall effect size for pain was -1.64 with a 95% CI from -2.69 to -0.59 which can be interpreted as large. In addition, significant improvements were observed in quality of life, depression, impact of the disease, anxiety, and physical function. Conclusion. Dance-based intervention programs can be an effective intervention for people suffering from fibromyalgia, leading to a significant reduction of the level of pain with an effect size that can be considered as large. However, findings and conclusions from this meta-analysis must be taken with caution due to the small number of articles and the large heterogeneity.

scholarly journals A Statistical Method for Synthesizing Meta-Analyses

2013 ◽  
Vol 2013 ◽  
pp. 1-9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Liansheng Larry Tang ◽  
Michael Caudy ◽  
Faye Taxman
Keyword(s):  
Statistical Method ◽  
Effect Size ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Effect Sizes ◽  
Weighted Mean ◽  
Summary Effect ◽  
Different Types ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
Size Estimates ◽  
Similar Search

Multiple meta-analyses may use similar search criteria and focus on the same topic of interest, but they may yield different or sometimes discordant results. The lack of statistical methods for synthesizing these findings makes it challenging to properly interpret the results from multiple meta-analyses, especially when their results are conflicting. In this paper, we first introduce a method to synthesize the meta-analytic results when multiple meta-analyses use the same type of summary effect estimates. When meta-analyses use different types of effect sizes, the meta-analysis results cannot be directly combined. We propose a two-step frequentist procedure to first convert the effect size estimates to the same metric and then summarize them with a weighted mean estimate. Our proposed method offers several advantages over existing methods by Hemming et al. (2012). First, different types of summary effect sizes are considered. Second, our method provides the same overall effect size as conducting a meta-analysis on all individual studies from multiple meta-analyses. We illustrate the application of the proposed methods in two examples and discuss their implications for the field of meta-analysis.

Two decades of digital interventions for anxiety disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis of treatment effectiveness

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-13
Author(s):  
Darin Pauley ◽  
Pim Cuijpers ◽  
Davide Papola ◽  
Clara Miguel ◽  
Eirini Karyotaki
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Anxiety Disorder ◽  
Confidence Interval ◽  
Anxiety Disorders ◽  
Effect Size ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Bibliographic Databases ◽  
Wait List ◽  
Digital Interventions ◽  
Significant Difference

Abstract Background Digital interventions for anxiety disorders are a promising solution to address barriers to evidence-based treatment access. Precise and powerful estimates of digital intervention effectiveness for anxiety disorders are necessary for further adoption in practice. The present systematic review and meta-analysis examined the effectiveness of digital interventions across all anxiety disorders and specific to each disorder v. wait-list and care-as-usual controls. Methods A systematic search of bibliographic databases identified 15 030 abstracts from inception to 1 January 2020. Forty-seven randomized controlled trials (53 comparisons; 4958 participants) contributed to the meta-analysis. Subgroup analyses were conducted by an anxiety disorder, risk of bias, treatment support, recruitment, location and treatment adherence. Results A large, pooled effect size of g = 0.80 [95% Confidence Interval: 0.68–0.93] was found in favor of digital interventions. Moderate to large pooled effect sizes favoring digital interventions were found for generalized anxiety disorder (g = 0.62), mixed anxiety samples (g = 0.68), panic disorder with or without agoraphobia (g = 1.08) and social anxiety disorder (g = 0.76) subgroups. No subgroups were significantly different or related to the pooled effect size. Notably, the effects of guided interventions (g = 0.84) and unguided interventions (g = 0.64) were not significantly different. Supplemental analysis comparing digital and face-to-face interventions (9 comparisons; 683 participants) found no significant difference in effect [g = 0.14 favoring digital interventions; Confidence Interval: −0.01 to 0.30]. Conclusion The precise and powerful estimates found further justify the application of digital interventions for anxiety disorders in place of wait-list or usual care.

Effect Sizes: Conventional Choices and Calculations

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael S. Rosenberg ◽  
Hannah R. Rothstein ◽  
Jessica Gurevitch
Keyword(s):  
Critical Point ◽  
Effect Size ◽  
Evolutionary Biology ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Statistical Parameter ◽  
Effect Sizes ◽  
Common Effect ◽  
Inference Methods ◽  
Conventional Effect ◽  
Estimate Effect Size

One of the fundamental concepts in meta-analysis is that of the effect size. An effect size is a statistical parameter that can be used to compare, on the same scale, the results of different studies in which a common effect of interest has been measured. This chapter describes the conventional effect sizes most commonly encountered in ecology and evolutionary biology, and the types of data associated with them. While choice of a specific measure of effect size may influence the interpretation of results, it does not influence the actual inference methods of meta-analysis. One critical point to remember is that one cannot combine different measures of effect size in a single meta-analysis: once you have chosen how you are going to estimate effect size, you need to use it for all of the studies to be analyzed.

M. Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
pp. 163-165
Author(s):  
Noémie Laurens
Keyword(s):  
Literature Review ◽  
Empirical Research ◽  
Effect Size ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Research Synthesis ◽  
Effect Sizes ◽  
Primary Research ◽  
Unit Of Analysis ◽  
Research Studies

This chapter illustrates meta-analysis, which is a specific type of literature review, and more precisely a type of research synthesis, alongside traditional narrative reviews. Unlike in primary research, the unit of analysis of a meta-analysis is the results of individual studies. And unlike traditional reviews, meta-analysis only applies to: empirical research studies with quantitative findings hat are conceptually comparable and configured in similar statistical forms. What further distinguishes meta-analysis from other research syntheses is the method of synthesizing the results of studies — i.e. the use of statistics and, in particular, of effect sizes. An effect size represents the degree to which the phenomenon under study exists.

scholarly journals Shoulder Range of Motion and Baseball Arm Injuries: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2018 ◽  
Vol 53 (12) ◽  
pp. 1190-1199 ◽  
Author(s):  
Garrett S. Bullock ◽  
Mallory S. Faherty ◽  
Leila Ledbetter ◽  
Charles A. Thigpen ◽  
Timothy C. Sell
Keyword(s):  
Range Of Motion ◽  
External Rotation ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
P Value ◽  
High Quality ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Baseball Players ◽  
Shoulder Range Of Motion ◽  
Methodologic Quality ◽  
Arm Injuries

Objective Arm injuries in baseball players are a common problem. The identification of modifiable risk factors, including range of motion (ROM), is essential for injury prevention. The purpose of this review was to assess the methodologic quality and level of evidence in the literature and to investigate the relationship between shoulder ROM and the risk of arm injuries in baseball players. Data Sources Relevant studies in PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, and SPORTDiscus published from inception to August 1, 2017. Study Selection Only studies that encompassed healthy baseball cohorts who were assessed for shoulder ROM and prospectively evaluated for injuries throughout a baseball season or seasons were included. Data Extraction Six articles met the search criteria. Only 3 studies were included in the meta-analysis due to disparate participant groups. Data Synthesis The modified Downs and Black scale (0–15 points) was used to analyze methodologic quality. Study quality ranged from 11 to 14. Four studies received high-quality (≥12) and 2 studies received moderate-quality (≥10) scores. The overall pooled analysis demonstrated that absolute and internal-rotation deficits (–5.93 [95% confidence interval {CI} = –9.43, –2.43], P < .001 and 4.28 [0.71, 7.86], P = .02, respectively) and absolute total ROM (TROM; –6.19 [95% CI = –10.28, –2.10]; P = .003) were predictors of injury, and these data exhibited homogeneity (absolute IR P value = .77, I2 = 0%; IR deficit P value = .41, I2 = 0%; absolute TROM P value = .78, I2 = 0%). No significance was observed for absolute external rotation (–2.86 [95% CI = –6.56, 0.83], P = .13), which had data with high heterogeneity (P = .003; I2 = 83%). A deficit in horizontal adduction was a predictor of injury (–8.32 [95% CI = –12.08, –4.56]; P < .001); these data were homogeneous but yielded a moderate heterogenic effect (P = .16; I2 = 50%). Conclusions High-quality evidence demonstrated that deficits in throwing-arm TROM and IR were associated with upper extremity injury in baseball players. Heterogeneity across studies for horizontal adduction suggested that this may be a modifiable risk factor for injury, but it requires further research.

scholarly journals A-17 Category Test performance in individuals with alcohol versus methamphetamine dependence

2019 ◽  
Vol 34 (6) ◽  
pp. 876-876
Author(s):  
A Walker ◽  
A Hauson ◽  
S Sarkissians ◽  
A Pollard ◽  
C Flora-Tostado ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Effect Size ◽  
Test Performance ◽  
Neuropsychological Functioning ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Effect Sizes ◽  
Significant Heterogeneity ◽  
Category Test ◽  
Methamphetamine Dependence ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Axis I

Abstract Objective The Category Test (CT) has consistently been found to be sensitive at detecting the effects of alcohol on the brain. However, this test has not been as widely used in examining the effects of methamphetamine. The current meta-analysis compared effect sizes of studies that have examined performance on the CT in alcohol versus methamphetamine dependent participants. Data selection Three researchers independently searched nine databases (e.g., PsycINFO, Pubmed, ProceedingsFirst), extracted required data, and calculated effect sizes. Inclusion criteria identified studies that had (a) compared alcohol or methamphetamine dependent groups to healthy controls and (b) matched groups on either age, education, or IQ (at least 2 out of 3). Studies were excluded if participants were reported to have Axis I diagnoses (other than alcohol or methamphetamine dependence) or comorbidities known to impact neuropsychological functioning. Sixteen articles were coded and analyzed for the current study. Data synthesis Alcohol studies showed a large effect size (g = 0.745, p < 0.001) while methamphetamine studies evidenced a moderate effect size (g = 0.406, p = 0.001); both without statistically significant heterogeneity (I2 = 0). Subgroup analysis revealed a statistically significant difference between the effect sizes from alcohol versus methamphetamine studies (Q-between = 5.647, p = 0.017). Conclusions The CT is sensitive to the effects of both alcohol and methamphetamine and should be considered when examining dependent patients who might exhibit problem solving, concept formation, and set loss difficulties in everyday living.

Test Frequency, Stakes, and Feedback in Student Achievement: A Meta-Analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 43 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 111-151 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard P. Phelps
Keyword(s):  
Student Achievement ◽  
Early Childhood ◽  
Effect Size ◽  
English Language ◽  
Variance Estimation ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
The United States ◽  
Research Literature ◽  
Effect Sizes ◽  
Test Frequency

Background: Test frequency, stakes associated with educational tests, and feedback from test results have been identified in the research literature as relevant factors in student achievement. Objectives: Summarize the separate and joint contribution to student achievement of these three treatments and their interactions via multivariable meta-analytic techniques using a database of English-language studies spanning a century (1910–2010), comprising 149 studies and 509 effect size estimates. Research design: Analysis employed robust variance estimation. Considered as potential moderators were hundreds of study features comprising various test designs and test administration, demographic, and source document characteristics. Subjects: Subjects were students at all levels, from early childhood to adult, mostly from the United States but also eight other countries. Results: We find a summary effect size of 0.84 for the three treatments collectively. Further analysis suggests benefits accrue to the incremental addition of combinations of testing and feedback or stakes and feedback. Moderator analysis shows higher effect sizes associated with the following study characteristics: more recent year of publication, summative (rather than formative) testing, constructed (rather than selected) item response formats, alignment of subject matter between pre- and posttests, and recognition/recall (rather than core subjects, art, or physical education). Conversely, lower effect sizes are associated with postsecondary students (rather than early childhood–upper secondary), special education population, larger study population, random assignment (rather than another sampling method), use of shadow test as outcome measure, designation of individuals (rather than groups) as units of analysis, and academic (rather than corporate or government) research.

scholarly journals Effects of Psychological Interventions on the Prevention of Sports Injuries: A Meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (8) ◽  
pp. 232596712092832
Author(s):  
Shanshan Li ◽  
Qianjin Wu ◽  
Zichao Chen
Keyword(s):  
Sports Injuries ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Significant Risk ◽  
Effect Sizes ◽  
Psychological Interventions ◽  
Random Effects Model ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Subgroup Analyses ◽  
Substantial Heterogeneity

Background: Studies have shown that preventive psychological interventions can reduce the occurrence of sports injuries. Purpose: To systematically evaluate the published literature on the effects of psychological interventions on rates of sports injuries and propose a set of psychological interventions to reduce such injuries. Study Design: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 1. Methods: A total of 11 randomized controlled trials and intervention control trials involving 1287 participants were included. A random-effects model was used to analyze the data. Pooled results were expressed as effect sizes and 95% CIs. Bias and heterogeneity among the studies were assessed, and sensitivity and subgroup analyses were performed. Results: Meta-analysis suggested that preventive psychological interventions effectively prevented the occurrence of sports injuries (effect size = –0.55; P < .001), although the studies showed substantial heterogeneity ( I 2 = 94.2%; P < .001), which could not be attributed to specific variables. Nevertheless, sensitivity analysis suggested that overall results were reliable. No significant risk of publication bias was found. Conclusion: Preventive psychological interventions moderately reduced the risk of sports injuries. Risk screening also significantly reduced the risk of sports injuries. These interventions should focus on cognitive behavior and be administered in 1 to 6 sessions over 7 to 12 weeks for 60 minutes per session.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document