Robust Bayesian Model-Averaged Meta-Regression (original) (raw)
2025-09-10
Robust Bayesian model-averaged meta-regression (RoBMA-reg) extends the robust Bayesian model-averaged meta-analysis (RoBMA) by including covariates in the meta-analytic model. RoBMA-reg allows for estimating and testing the moderating effects of study-level covariates on the meta-analytic effect in a unified framework (e.g., accounting for uncertainty in the presence vs. absence of the effect, heterogeneity, and publication bias). This vignette illustrates how to fit a robust Bayesian model-averaged meta-regression using the RoBMA R package. We reproduce the example from Bartoš et al. (2025), who re-analyzed a meta-analysis of the effect of household chaos on child executive functions with the mean age and assessment type covariates based on Andrews et al. (2021)’s meta-analysis.
First, we fit a frequentist meta-regression using themetafor R package. Second, we explain the Bayesian meta-regression model specification, the default prior distributions for continuous and categorical moderators, and standardized effect sizes input specification. Third, we estimate Bayesian model-averaged meta-regression (without publication bias adjustment). Finally, we estimate the complete robust Bayesian model-averaged meta-regression.
Data
We start by loading the Andrews2021 dataset included in the RoBMA R package, which contains 36 estimates of the effect of household chaos on child executive functions with the mean age and assessment type covariates. The dataset includes correlation coefficients (r), standard errors of the correlation coefficients (se), the type of executive function assessment (measure), and the mean age of the children (age) in each study.
library(RoBMA)
data("Andrews2021", package = "RoBMA")
head(Andrews2021)
#> r se measure age
#> 1 0.070 0.04743416 direct 4.606660
#> 2 0.033 0.04371499 direct 2.480833
#> 3 0.170 0.10583005 direct 7.750000
#> 4 0.208 0.08661986 direct 4.000000
#> 5 0.270 0.02641969 direct 4.000000
#> 6 0.170 0.05147815 direct 4.487500References
Andrews, K., Atkinson, L., Harris, M., & Gonzalez, A. (2021). Examining the effects of household chaos on child executive functions:A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin,147(1), 16–32. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000311
Bartoš, F., Maier, M., Stanley, T., & Wagenmakers, E.-J. (2025). Robust Bayesian meta-regression:Model-averaged moderation analysis in the presence of publication bias. Psychological Methods. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000737
Bartoš, F., Maier, M., Wagenmakers, E.-J., Doucouliagos, H., & Stanley, T. D. (2023). Robust Bayesian meta-analysis:Model-averaging across complementary publication bias adjustment methods. Research Synthesis Methods, 14(1), 99–116. https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1594
Lenth, R. V., Bolker, B., Buerkner, P., Giné-Vázquez, I., Herve, M., Jung, M., Love, J., Miguez, F., Riebl, H., & Singmann, H. (2017).emmeans: Estimated marginal means, aka least-squares means. https://cran.r-project.org/package=emmeans
Stanley, T., Doucouliagos, H., Maier, M., & Bartoš, F. (2024). Correcting bias in the meta-analysis of correlations. Psychological Methods. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000662
Wolfgang, V. (2010). Conducting meta-analyses in R with themetafor package. Journal of Statistical Software, 36(3), 1–48. https://www.jstatsoft.org/v36/i03/