Re: [R] differences between meat and metafor packages

t; res <- rma(HR, vi=SE^2, data=a, method="REML", slab=paste(a$study), > digits=3) > > Best, > Wolfgang > > -Original Message- > From: greg holly [mailto:mak.hho...@gmail.com] > Sent: Monday, 25 February, 2019 21:20 > To: Viechtbauer, Wolfgang (SP) > Sub

Re: [R] differences between meat and metafor packages

ata=a, method="REML", slab=paste(a$study), digits=3) Best, Wolfgang -Original Message- From: greg holly [mailto:mak.hho...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, 25 February, 2019 21:20 To: Viechtbauer, Wolfgang (SP) Subject: Re: [R] differences between meat and metafor packages Hi Wolfg

Re: [R] differences between meat and metafor packages

y, 25 February, 2019 18:40 To: r-help mailing list Subject: [R] differences between meat and metafor packages Hi all; I have got different results (CI and Q value for heterogeneity, tau) on the same data when I run meta and metafor for hazard ratio with a random effects model. The basic programs f

[R] differences between meat and metafor packages

Hi all; I have got different results (CI and Q value for heterogeneity, tau) on the same data when I run meta and metafor for hazard ratio with a random effects model. The basic programs for both are given below. What can cause? Regards, Greg Metafor res <- rma(HR, SE, data=a) predict(res, tran