Using R for Meta-Analysis in Business Research Context

Authors

  • Gamon Savatsomboon Mahasarakham Business School, Mahasarakham University, Mahasarakham 44150, Thailand
  • Ong-art Chanprasitchai Mahasarakham Business School, Mahasarakham University, Mahasarakham 44150, Thailand
  • Anirut Pongklee Faculty of Agriculture and Technology, Nakhon Phanom University, Nakhon Phanom 48000, Thailand
  • Sujin Butdisuwan School of Liberal Arts, Shinawatra University, Pathum Thani 12160, Thailand
  • Piyapun Santaveesuk School of Liberal Arts, Shinawatra University, Pathum Thani 12160, Thailand
  • Kanokwan Noppan Independent Researcher

Keywords:

Meta-analysis, PICO, PRISMA, R, meta Package, dmetar Package

Abstract

R is widely used to perform meta-analysis for international publication. However, R has been rarely used by Thai academics and researchers to conduct meta-analyses for research and publication. This could be viewed as a practice gap. Thus, the goal of this paper is to alleviate this gap by encouraging the Thai academic and research community to use R for meta-analysis in the business research context. This article will demonstrate that R is just as effective as other programs at performing a basic meta-analysis, and beyond. The article is divided broadly into two main parts: systematic review and meta-analysis. The idea of systematic reviews is explained in the first part of the article, which comprises two subsections. The primary goal of Subsection 1 is the application of SRQ (instead of PICO), a framework for precisely articulating the research question that serves as the basis for additional literature inclusion in the meta-analysis at hand. Subsection 2, which defines the criteria for accepting or rejecting studies to be included in a meta-analysis study at hand, deals with the application of PRISMA. The remaining part of the paper focuses on how meta-analysis is carried out in R, as well as related topics, starting with the import of datasets for analysis from an Excel file. Examples of R scripts are provided to conduct meta-analysis using R. Text outputs of all required statistics are generated, for example, pooled effect sizes in the form of common (fixed) and random effects for assessing the heterogeneity of studies included in the meta-analysis at hand. In addition, R can generate both forest and funnel plots. The paper also discusses how to use the funnel plot to determine the publication bias of the study. R is fully capable of doing comprehensive meta-analyses, being on par with or even surpassing other programs in some areas. Thai researchers and academics can utilize R with confidence. Thus, Thai researchers and academics are strongly encouraged to use R for meta-analysis and share their findings, like other international researchers.

References

Balduzzi, S., Rücker, G., & Schwarzer, G. (2019). How to perform a meta-analysis with R: A practical tutorial. Evidence-based Mental Health, 22(4), 153–160. https://doi.org/10.1136/ebmental-2019-300117

Cajal, B., Jiménez, R. M. M., Gervilla, E., & Montaño, J. C. M. (2020). Doing a systematic review in health sciences. Clínica Y Salud, 31(2), 77–83. https://doi.org/10.5093/clysa2020a15

Chananet, C. (2010). Using R program for meta-analysis. The Journal of Applied Science, 9(1), 28-38. https://www.journal.sci.kmutnb.ac.th/journal_files/3_1_2553.pdf

Dechpichai, P., Kongchareon, J., Suwanateep, N., Tuprakay, S.R., Pongsopa, J. (2017). Kham Chuk Nai Lok Phoom Phae Nai Dek Thai: Kan Vi Klo Apiman [The pooled prevalence of allergic disease]. Advances Science, 17(2), 78-98. https://sci.bsru.ac.th/sciweb/e-magazine/17-2/chapter-7.pdf (In Thai)

Dettori, J. R., Norvell, D. C., & Chapman, J. R. (2021). Seeing the forest by looking at the trees: how to interpret a meta-analysis forest plot. Global Spine Journal, 11(4), 614–616. https://doi.org/10.1177/21925682211003889

Dettori, J. R., Norvell, D. C., & Chapman, J. R. (2022). Fixed-effect vs random-effects models for meta-analysis: 3 points to consider. Global Spine Journal, 12(7), 1624–1626. https://doi.org/10.1177/21925682221110527

Feeley, T. H. (2020). Assessing study quality in meta-analysis. Human Communication Research, 46(2–3), 334–342. https://doi.org/10.1093/hcr/hqaa001

Gogtay, N. J. & Thatte, U. M. (2017). An introduction to meta-analysis. Journal of the Association of Physicians in India, 65, 78-85. https://www.kem.edu/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/14-An-introduction_to_meta_analysis-1.pdf

Harrer, M., Cuijpers, P., Furukawa, T. A., & Ebert, D. D. (2021). Doing meta-analysis with R: A hands-on guide. Chapman & Hall/CRC Press.

Ibrahim, B. (2021). Social media marketing activities and brand loyalty: A meta-analysis examination. Journal of Promotion Management, 28(1), 60–90.

https://doi.org/10.1080/10496491.2021.1955080

Linden, A., & Hönekopp, J. (2021). Heterogeneity of research results: A new perspective from which to assess and promote progress in psychological science. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 16(2), 358–376. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691620964193

O’Rourke, K. (2007). A historical perspective on meta-analysis: Dealing quantitatively with varying study results. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, 100(12), 579–582.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0141076807100012020

Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., Chou, R., Glanville, J., Grimshaw, J. M., Hróbjartsson, A., Lalu, M. M., Li, T., Loder, E. W., Mayo-Wilson, E., McDonald, S., & McGuinness, L. A. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. British Medical Journal, 372(71). https://www.bmj.com/content/372/bmj.n71

Paul, J., & Barari, M. (2022). Meta‐analysis and traditional systematic literature reviews—What, why, when, where, and how? Psychology & Marketing, 39(6), 1099–1115.

https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.21657

R Core Team (2021). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.R-project.org/.

S, Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. PLOS Medicine, 18(3), Article e1003583.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1003583

Simmonds, M. (2015). Quantifying the risk of error when interpreting funnel plots. Systematic Reviews, 4(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-015-0004-8

Spineli, L. M., & Pandis, N. (2020). Fixed-effect versus random-effects model in meta-regression analysis. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, 158(5), 770–772. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2020.07.016

Tatsioni, A., & Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2017). Meta-analysis. International Encyclopedia of Public Health, 117–124. https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-12-803678-5.00291-5

Wickham, H. &, Bryan, J. (2023). readxl: Read Excel files. [R package]. https://readxl.tidyverse.org

Downloads

Published

2024-04-28

How to Cite

Savatsomboon, G., Chanprasitchai, O.- art, Pongklee, A., Butdisuwan, S., Santaveesuk, P., & Noppan, K. (2024). Using R for Meta-Analysis in Business Research Context . Journal of Research Methodology, 37(1), 67–88. Retrieved from https://so12.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/jrm/article/view/675

Issue

Vol. 37 No. 1 (2024)

Section

Academic Article

License

Copyright (c) 2024 The Authors

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.