95 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20565166)
1. A meta-analysis with nothing to hide: reply to Hyman (2010).
Storm L; Tressoldi PE; Risio LD
Psychol Bull; 2010 Jul; 136(4):491-4. PubMed ID: 20565166
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Meta-analysis that conceals more than it reveals: comment on Storm et al. (2010).
Hyman R
Psychol Bull; 2010 Jul; 136(4):486-90. PubMed ID: 20565165
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. A Bayes factor meta-analysis of recent extrasensory perception experiments: comment on Storm, Tressoldi, and Di Risio (2010).
Rouder JN; Morey RD; Province JM
Psychol Bull; 2013 Jan; 139(1):241-7. PubMed ID: 23294092
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Meta-analysis of free-response studies, 1992-2008: assessing the noise reduction model in parapsychology.
Storm L; Tressoldi PE; Di Risio L
Psychol Bull; 2010 Jul; 136(4):471-85. PubMed ID: 20565164
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Correction to storm, Tressoldi, and di Risio (2010).
Psychol Bull; 2015 Mar; 141(2):403. PubMed ID: 25730257
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Testing the Storm et al. (2010) meta-analysis using Bayesian and frequentist approaches: reply to Rouder et al. (2013).
Storm L; Tressoldi PE; Utts J
Psychol Bull; 2013 Jan; 139(1):248-254. PubMed ID: 23294093
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Psychic drift. Why most scientists do not believe in ESP and psi phenomena.
Shermer M
Sci Am; 2003 Feb; 288(2):31. PubMed ID: 12561455
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Testing for Questionable Research Practices in a Meta-Analysis: An Example from Experimental Parapsychology.
Bierman DJ; Spottiswoode JP; Bijl A
PLoS One; 2016; 11(5):e0153049. PubMed ID: 27144889
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Does psi exist? Comments on Milton and Wiseman's (1999) meta-analysis of ganzfeld research.
Storm L; Ertel S
Psychol Bull; 2001 May; 127(3):424-33; discussion 434-8. PubMed ID: 11393304
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Why psychologists must change the way they analyze their data: the case of psi: comment on Bem (2011).
Wagenmakers EJ; Wetzels R; Borsboom D; van der Maas HL
J Pers Soc Psychol; 2011 Mar; 100(3):426-32. PubMed ID: 21280965
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. The utility of meta-analysis in the determination of efficacy of treatment in aphasia: a reply to Robey (1994).
Nye C; Lorch MP; Whurr R
Brain Lang; 1997 Apr; 57(2):280-2. PubMed ID: 9126417
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Evidence-based medicine, systematic reviews, and guidelines in interventional pain management: part 6. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of observational studies.
Manchikanti L; Datta S; Smith HS; Hirsch JA
Pain Physician; 2009; 12(5):819-50. PubMed ID: 19787009
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. The meta-analytic approach to research integration.
Onyskiw JE
Can J Nurs Res; 1996; 28(3):69-85. PubMed ID: 8997940
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Meta-analysis as a tool for evidence-based practice: an example using the Rice meta-analysis of smoking cessation interventions.
Leonard EE; Wynd CA
Appl Nurs Res; 2008 Feb; 21(1):40-4. PubMed ID: 18226762
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Homeopathy again: a questionable meta-analysis.
Prescrire Int; 1998 Jun; 7(35):94-5. PubMed ID: 10342930
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. [Meta-analysis: the science of review in Neurology].
Allam MF; Del Castillo AS; Navajas RF
Rev Neurol; 2005 Feb 16-28; 40(4):222-8. PubMed ID: 15765317
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Meta-analytical issues for prevention intervention research.
Tobler N
NIDA Res Monogr; 1994; 142():342-403. PubMed ID: 9243541
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Empirical evaluation showed that the Copas selection model provided a useful summary in 80% of meta-analyses.
Carpenter JR; Schwarzer G; Rücker G; Künstler R
J Clin Epidemiol; 2009 Jun; 62(6):624-631.e4. PubMed ID: 19282148
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Meta-analysis and meta-analytic monitoring of clinical trials.
Feinstein AR
Stat Med; 1996 Jun; 15(12):1273-80; discussion 1281-3. PubMed ID: 8817801
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Fixed- versus random-effects models in meta-analysis: model properties and an empirical comparison of differences in results.
Schmidt FL; Oh IS; Hayes TL
Br J Math Stat Psychol; 2009 Feb; 62(Pt 1):97-128. PubMed ID: 18001516
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
