A tutorial on conducting meta-analyses of clinical outcome research

Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research

Volumn 41, Issue 6, 1998, Pages 1227-1241

  Robey, Randall R ^a   Dalebout, Susan D ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Audiology; Clinical outcome research; Meta analysis; Speech language pathology; Treatment effectiveness

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; AUDIOLOGY; CLINICAL RESEARCH; LANGUAGE DISABILITY; META ANALYSIS; OUTCOMES RESEARCH; PHONETICS; QUALITY OF LIFE; SPEECH DISORDER; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 0031646928     PISSN: 10924388     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1044/jslhr.4106.1227     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. *Abrams, H. B., Hnath-Chisolm, T., Guerreiro, S. M., Ritterman, S. I. (1992). The effects of intervention strategy on self-perception of hearing handicap. Ear and Hearing, 13, 371-377.
2. Andrews, G., Guitar, B., & Howie, P. (1980) Meta-analysis of the effects of stuttering treatment. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 45, 287-307.
3. Bangert-Drowns, R. L. (1986). Review of developments in meta-analytic method. Psychological Bulletin, 99, 388-399.
4. Barcikowski, R. S., & Robey, R. R. (1985). Sample size selection in the single group repeated measures analysis. A paper presented before the annual convention of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.
5. *Bentler, R. A., Niebuhr, D. P., Getta, J. P., Anderson, C. V. (1993). Longitudinal Study of Hearing Aid Effectiveness: II. Subjective measures. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 36, 820-831.
6. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
7. Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (1979). Quasi-experimentation: Design and analysis of field settings. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
8. Dalebout, S. D., & Robey, R. R. (1997). Comparison of the intersubject and intrasubject variability of exongenous and endogenous auditory evoked potentials. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 8, 342-354.
9. *Demorest, M. E., & Walden, B. E. (1984). Psychometric principles in the selection, interpretation, and evaluation of communication self-assessment inventories. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 49, 226-240.
10. Frattali, C. M. (1998). Outcomes measurement: Definitions, dimensions, and perspectives. In C. M. Frattali (Ed.), Measuring outcomes in speech-language pathology (pp. 1-27). New York: Thieme.
11. Frattali, C. M., Thompson, C. K., Holland, A. L., Wohl, C. B., & Ferketic, M. M. (1995). The American Speech-Language-Hearing Association Functional Assessment of Communication Skills for Adults. Rockville, MD: American Speech-Language-Hearing Association.
12. Giolas, T. J., Owens, E., Lamb, S. H., & Schubert, E. D. (1979). Hearing Performance Inventory. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 44, 169-195.
13. Glass, G. V., McGraw, B., & Smith, M. L. (1981). Meta-analysis in social research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
14. Greenhouse, J. B., & Iyengar, S. (1994). Sensitivity analysis and diagnostics. In H. Cooper & L. V. Hedges (Eds.), The handbook of research synthesis (pp. 383-398). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
15. Hall, J. A., Rosenthal, R., Tickle-Degnen, L, Mosteller, F. (1994). Hypotheses and problem in research synthesis. In H. Cooper & L. V. Hedges (Eds.), The handbook of research synthesis (pp. 17-28). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
16. Hedges, L. V. (1994). Fixed effects models. In H. Cooper & L. V. Hedges (Eds.), The handbook of research synthesis (pp. 285-299). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
17. Hedges, L. V., & Olkin, I. (1985). Statistical methods for meta-analysis. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
18. Hunter, J. E., & Schmidt, F. L. (1990). Methods of meta-analysis: Correcting error and bias in research findings. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
19. Kertesz, A. (1984). Neurobiological aspects of recovery from aphasia in stroke. International Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine, 6, 122-127.
20. Kirk, R. E. (1990). Statistics: An introduction (3rd ed.). Orlando, FL: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
21. Kohler, H. (1988). Essentials of statistics. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman.
22. *Malinoff, R. L., & Weinstein, B. E. (1989). Measurement of hearing aid benefit in the elderly. Ear and Hearing, 10, 354-356.
23. Matt, G. E., & Cook, T. D. (1994). Threats to the validity of research synthesis. In H. Cooper & L. V. Hedges (Eds.), The handbook of research synthesis (pp. 503-520). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
24. Maxwell, S. E., & Delaney, H. D. (1990). Designing experiments and analyzing data: A model comparison perspective. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing.
25. *Mulrow, C. D., Aguilar, C., Endicott, J. E., Tuley, M. R., Velez, R., Charlip, W. S., Rhodes, M. C., Hill, J. A., & DeNini, L. A. (1990). Quality-of-life changes and hearing impairment. Annals of Internal Medicine, 113, 188-194.
26. *Newman, C. W., Hug, G. A., Wharton, J. A., Jacobson, G. P. (1993). The influence of hearing aid cost on perceived benefit in older adults. Ear and Hearing, 14, 285-289.
27. Newman, C. W., & Weinstein, B. E. (1988). The Hearing Handicap Inventory for the Elderly as a measure of hearing benefit. Ear and Hearing, 9, 81-85.
28. Orwin, R. G. (1994). Evaluating coding decisions. In H. Cooper & L. V. Hedges (Eds.), The Handbook of Research Synthesis (pp. 139-162). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
29. Petitti, D. B. (1994). Meta-analysis, decision analysis, and cost-effectiveness analysis. New York: Oxford University Press.
30. Raudenbush, S. W. (1994). Random effects models. In H. Cooper & L. V. Hedges (Eds.), The handbook of research synthesis (pp. 301-321). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
31. Ray, J. W., & Shadish, W. R. (1996). How interchangeable are different estimators of effect size? Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 64, 1316-1325.
32. Robey, R. R. (1994). The efficacy of treatment for aphasic persons: A meta-analysis. Brain and Language, 47, 585-608.
33. Robey, R. R. (1998). A meta-analysis of clinical outcomes in the treatment of aphasia. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research, 41, 172-187.
34. Robey, R. R., & Schultz, M. C. (1993). Optimizing theories and experiments. San Diego: Singular.
35. Robey, R. R., & Schultz, M. C. (1988). A Model for Conducting Clinical Outcome Research: An Adaptation of the Standard Protocol for Use in Aphasiology. Aphasiology, 12, 787-810.
36. SAS Institute Inc. (1994) SAS System Under Microsoft Windows (Release 6.10). Cary, NC: Author.
37. Stock, W. A. (1994). Systematic coding for research synthesis. In H. Cooper & L. V. Hedges (Eds.), The handbook of research synthesis (pp. 125-138). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
38. *Taylor, K. S. (1993). Self-perceived and audiometric evaluations of hearing aid benefit in the elderly. Ear and Hearing, 14, 390-394.
39. Ventry, I. M., & Weinstein, B. E. (1982). The hearing handicap inventory for the elderly: A new tool. Ear and Hearing, 3, 128-133.
40. Weinstein, B. E. (1996). Treatment efficacy: hearing aids in the management of hearing loss in adults. Journal of Speech-Language-Hearing Research, 39, S37-S45.
41. Weinstein, B. E., Spitzer, J. B., & Ventry, I. M. (1986). Test-retest reliability of the Hearing Handicap Inventory for the Elderly. Ear and Hearing, 7, 295-299.
42. Wertz, R. T. (1987). Language treatment for aphasia is efficacious, but for whom? Topics in Language Disorders, 8, 1-10.
43. Wortman, P. M. (1994). Judging research quality. In H. Cooper & L. V. Hedges (Eds.), The handbook of research synthesis (pp. 97-109). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
44. Whurr, R., Lorch, M. P., & Nye, C. (1992). A meta-analysis of studies carried out between 1946 and 1988 concerned with the efficacy of speech and language treatment for aphasic patients. European Journal of Disorders of Communication, 27, 1-17.