Meta-Analysis Sample Clauses

Meta-Analysis. Parental care Twenty-five studies were identified that measured perceived parental care (Xxxxxxx, 2011; Xxxxx et al., 2003; Xxxxx, Xxxxxxxx, Xxxx, & Xxxxxxx, 2000; Xxxxx, Xxxxxx, Xxxxx, & Xxxxxx, 1990; Xxxxxxx, Xxxxxx, Lerer, Xxxxxx, & Xxxxxx, 2008; Xxxxx et al., 2012; Xx Xxxxxxxx, Xxxxxxxxx, Xxxxx, Xxxx, & Xxxxxxx, 2003; Xxxx, Xxxxx, Xxxxxx, Yellowlees, & Xxxxxxxx, 2011; Xx Xxxxxxx et al., 1998; Xxxxxxx, Xxxxxxx, Xxxxx, & Xxxx, 2010; Xxxxxxxx et al., 2011; Xxxxx, 1984; Xxxxxxx & Laporte, 2002; Xxxx & Xxxxxxx, 1992; Laporte & Xxxxxxx, 2007; Xxxxx, Xxxxxx, & Xxxxxx, 2000; Xxxxxx, Xxxxxxxxxxx, & Xxxxxxxx, 1988; Xxxxxx & Kroger, 1992; Xxxxxxx, Xxxxx-Xxxxxxxx, Xxx, & Xxxxxxx, 1992; Xxxxxxx, Xxx xxx Xxxx, Xxxxxxxxx, & Xxxxxxxx, 1989; Xxxxxxxx-Xxxxx et al., 2005; Xxxxxxx et al., 2010; Xxxxxxxxxxxx & Perris, 1994; Xxxx, Xxxxxxxxx, & Xxxxxx, 2007; Xxxxxxxxx et al., 2000). Each study measured parental care using the Parental Bonding Instrument (PBI). The studies were included in the meta-analysis shown in the forest plot in Figure 2. People with ED reported lower levels of perceived parental care with a moderate ES 0.53 (95%CI: 0.41, 0.65, p < .001) relative to HC. This overall effect remained moderate .51 (p < .001) after adjusting using the meta-regression and there was no evidence of publication bias (Begg’s test p=.080; Xxxxx’x test p=.413).
Sample 1
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Meta-Analysis. Parental overprotection The same twenty-six studies as in the prior analysis were included in the meta-analysis of perceived parental overprotection shown in Figure 3 (Amianto, 2011; Bonne et al., 2003; Bulik et al., 2000; Calam et al., 1990; Xxxxxxx et al., 2008; Cardi et al., 2012; De Panfilis et al., 2003; Xxxx et al., 2011; Di Pentima et al., 1998; Xxxxxxx et al., 2010; Xxxxxxxx et al., 2011; Xxxxx, 1984; Xxxxxxx & Xxxxxxx, 0000; Kent & Xxxxxxx, 1992; Xxxxxxx & Xxxxxxx, 2007; Xxxxx et al., 2000; Xxxxxx et al., 1988; Xxxxxx & Kroger, 1992; Xxxxxxx et al., 1992; Xxxxxxx et al., 1989; Xxxxxxxx-Xxxxx et al., 2005; Xxxxxxx et al., 2010; Vandereycken & Perris, 1994; Xxxx et al., 2007; Yamaguchi et al., 2000). People with ED reported higher levels of overprotection with a small ES 0.33 (95%CI: 0.21, 0.45, p < .001) relative to HC. This overall effect remained small .29 (p = .022) following adjustments made to the overall effect by the meta-regression. We found evidence of publication bias (Begg’s test p=.025; Xxxxx’x test p=.036). The trim and fill method estimated that twenty studies were missing from the analysis. The adjusted ES remained small .14 (95%CI: 0.01, 0.27, p = .033) after correcting for publication bias using this method.
Sample 1
Meta-Analysis. Alexithymia Twenty-nine studies were identified in the area of alexithymia (Adenzato, Todisco, & Xxxxxx, 2012; Beadle, Paradiso, Xxxxxxx, & XxXxxxxxx, 2013; Bourke, Taylor, Parker, & Xxxxx, 1992; Cochrane, Brewerton, Wilson, & Xxxxxx, 1993; de Groot, Rodin, & Olmsted, 1995; De Panfilis et al., 2003; de Zwaan et al., 1995; de Zwaan, Biener, Bach, Wiesnagrotzki, & Xxxxxxx, 1996; Xxxxxxx et al., 2008; Xxxxxxxxxx, xx Xxxxxxx, Xxxx, Xxxxxxxx, & Xxxxxx, 0000; Jimerson, Wolfe, Franko, Covino, & Sifneos, 1994; Xxxxxxx et al., 2006; Xxxxxxx et al., 2013; Kuhnpast, Xxxxxxx, & Xxxxxxxx, 2012; Miyake, Onoda, Shirao, Okamoto, & Yamawaki, 2012; Nandrino et al., 2012; Xxxxxxxx, Xxxx, Xxxxx, Xxxxxxxxxx, & Pezard, 2006; Xxxxxxx, Xxxxxxxxx, & Xxxxxxx, 0000; Pinaquy, Chabrol, Simon, Louvet, & Barbe, 2003; Pollatos et al., 2008; Schmidt, Jiwany, & Treasure, 1993; Xxxxxxx-Xxxxxx, Mainz, Fink, Xxxxxxxx- Xxxxxxxx, & Konrad, 2012; Xxxxxxxx et al., 2005; Xxxxxx, Parker, Bagby, & Bourke, 1996; Tchanturia, Davies, Harrison, et al., 2012; Xxxxxx et al., 2011; Troop, Schmidt, & Treasure, 1995; Zeeck, Stelzer, Linster, Joos, & Xxxxxxxx, 2011; Zonnevijlle-Bendek et al., 2002; Xxxxxxxxxx-Xxxxxx et al., 2004). The studies are presented in the forest plot in Figure 7. People with ED have high levels of alexithymia with a large ES 1.31 (95%CI: 1.15, 1.46, p < .001). This effect became nonsignificant after adjusting using the meta-regression .66 (p = .50). Publication bias was found (Begg’s test p=.002; Xxxxx’x test p<.001) and fourteen studies were estimated by the trim and fill method to be missing from the analysis. The adjusted ES remained large .99 (95%CI: 0.82, 1.15, p < .001) after correcting for publication bias. Study Measure Outcome Self-Knowledge: Alexithymia SMD (95% CI) % Weight AN Adenzato et al. 2012 Xxxxxx et al. 2013 Bourke et al. 1992 Cochrane et al. 1993a de Zwaan et al. 1996a Eizaguirre et al. 2003a Xxxxxxx et al. 2006a Miyake et al. 2012 Nandrino et al. 2006 Nandrino et al. 2012 Parling et al. 2010 Pollatos et al. 2008 Xxxxxxx et al. 1993 Xxxxxxx-Xxxxxx et al. 2012 Soussignan et al. 2011 Xxxxxxxx et al. 2005a Xxxxxx et al. 1996 Tchanturia et al. 2012a Xxxxxx et al. 2011 Troop et al. 1995a Zonnevijlle-Bendek et al. 2002 Xxxxxxxxxx-Xxxxxx et al. 2004b Subtotal TAS TAS TAS TAS TAS TAS TAS TAS TAS TAS TAS TAS TAS TAS TAS TAS TAS TAS TAS TAS TAS TAS Alexithymia Alexithymia Alexithymia Alexithymia Alexithymia Alexithymia Alexithymia Alexithymia Alexithymia Alexithymia Alexithy...
Sample 1
Meta-Analysis. Insecure attachment Eight studies were identified for the area of insecure attachment. Each study measured classic insecure attachment via-self report (Amianto, Xxxxxx-Xxxx, Morando, Sobrero, & Xxxxxxx, 2011; Chassler, 1997; Holliday, Uher, Landau, Collier, & Treasure, 2006; Illing, Tasca, Balfour, & Xxxxxxx, 2010; Xxxxxx, Xxxxx, & Xxx, 0000; Miljkovitch, Pierrehumbert, Karmaniola, Bader, & Xxxxxx, 2005; Tereno, Soares, Martins, Celani, & Sarnpaio, 2008; Troisi, Massaroni, & Cuzzolaro, 2005). Figure 1 presents the forest plot for the meta-analysis of insecure attachment. Relative to HC, people with ED report insecure attachment with a large ES 0.91 (95%CI: 0.76, 0.07, p < .001). This overall effect remains large even after adjusting with the meta-regression 1.13 (p < .001). There was no evidence of publication bias (Begg’s test p=.537; Xxxxx’x test p=.761). Affiliation and Attachment: Insecure Attachment Affiliation and Attachment 3. Systematic Review of Social Processes in Eating Disorders 74 % Study Measure Outcome Affiliation and Attachment : Insecure attachment SMD (95% CI) Weight AN Xxxxxx et al. 2002a AAS InsecureStyle
Sample 1
Meta-Analysis. Agency The definition of agency according to the RDoC project is "the ability to recognize one’s self as the agent of one’s actions and thoughts, including the recognition of one’s own body/body parts"(as defined in the NIMH workshop: xxxx://xxx.xxxx.xxx.xxx/research-priorities/rdoc/rdoc-social- processes.pdf). The sense of agency refers to the ability to recognize oneself as the agent of a behaviour and, as a result, to the proprioceptive awareness that one's body corresponds to the agent itself (Jeannerod, 2003). Animacy on the other hand is the ability to perceive that another entity is an agent showing contingent behaviours. Five studies measured the sense of agency using experimental tasks (Xxxxxxx et al., 2001; Eshkevari et al., 2012; Guardia, Cottencin, Thomas, Dodin, & Luyat, 2012; Keizer, Smeets, Dijkerman, van Elburg, & Xxxxxx, 2012; Papezova, Yamamotova, & Xxxx, 2005). The studies were included in the forest plot shown in Figure 5. People with ED have a lower sense of agency with a moderate ES 0.50 (95%CI: 0.36, 0.65, p < .001). The overall small effect becomes nonsignificant .39 (p=.264) after using the meta-regression. There was no evidence of publication bias (Begg’s test p=.189; Xxxxx’x test p=.109).
Sample 1
Meta-Analysis. Understanding mental states Twelve studies measured ‘Understanding Mental States’ through experimental tasks (Adenzato et al., 2012; Gillberg et al., 2010; Xxxxxxx & Treasure, 2013; Xxxxxxx et al., 2013; Harrison, Tchanturia, et al., 2010; Xxxxxxxx et al., 2009; Xxxxxx et al., 2012; Xxxxxx-Xxxxxx, Xxxxxxx, Xxxxxxx-Moya, Grau, & Obiols, 2012; Xxxxxxxxx et al., 2010; Renwick, Dejong, et al., 2013; Russell, Schmidt, Doherty, Young, & Tchanturia, 2009; Tchanturia et al., 2004). The studies were included in the forest plot shown in Figure 8. Individuals with ED showed poorer perception of the mental states of others relative to HC. The overall ES was moderate at .44 (95%CI: 0.27, 0.62, p < .001) and this became larger 1.07 (p = .001) after adjusting using the meta-regression. Publication bias was found (Begg’s test p=.002; Xxxxx’x test p=.001. The trim and fill method estimated that four studies were missing from the analysis. The adjusted ES remained small .32 (95%CI: 0.13, 0.50, p = .001) after correcting for this bias.
Sample 1
Meta-Analysis. Social dominance Eight studies were included in the meta-analysis of social dominance (Cardi et al., 2014; Carter, Kelly, & Xxxxxxx, 2012; Xxxxx & Xxxxx, 2012; Hartmann, Zeeck, & Xxxxxxx, 2010; Masheb, Grilo, & Xxxxxxxx, 0000; Swan & Xxxxxxx, 2003; Troop et al., 1995; Waller, Ohanian, Xxxxx, & Xxxxx, 2000). These studies measured social dominance through self-report questionnaires. They are presented in the forest plot shown in Figure 9. People with ED reported a greater sense of social inferiority than controls with a large ES at 1.22 (95%CI: 0.87, 1.56, p < .001) and this overall effect remained large 1.08 (p = .006) after adjusting using the meta-regression. There was no evidence of publication bias (Begg’s test p=.381; Xxxxx’x test p=.089).
Sample 1
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Meta-Analysis. Insights gained from meta-analysis can be useful to resolve several issues faced in combining surveys, as survey heterogeneity, planning data collection, and pooling data across surveys (Xxxxxx 1999). Xxxxx and Xxxxxxxxx (1990) define meta-analysis as “the practice of using statistical methods to combine the outcomes of a series of different experiments or investigations”. It implies four steps: identifying all relevant studies; assessing study quality; dealing with study heterogeneity; and summarizing the results. Xxxx (1998b), in the context of constructing an average birth rate for a continent using separate country birth rates, proposes three options for pooling multinational samples that are directly comparable to the three main meta-analytic models for combining study effect sizes: fixed effects (equal weight to each country’s estimate); equal effects (all subjects are independent and of equal importance); and random effects (weighed averages of the study proportions). Combining separate sites When similar data are collected in several sites (cities, provinces or districts of one country) of a combined population, but not in all of the sites, alternative treatments of them are possible (Xxxx 1999a). In combining separate sites three decisions must be made: the allocation of sample sizes, whether the samples should be combined and what weighting to use. These are expressed as follows by Xxxx.
Sample 1

Related to Meta-Analysis

  • Risk Analysis The Custodian will provide the Fund with a Risk Analysis with respect to Securities Depositories operating in the countries listed in Appendix B. If the Custodian is unable to provide a Risk Analysis with respect to a particular Securities Depository, it will notify the Fund. If a new Securities Depository commences operation in one of the Appendix B countries, the Custodian will provide the Fund with a Risk Analysis in a reasonably practicable time after such Securities Depository becomes operational. If a new country is added to Appendix B, the Custodian will provide the Fund with a Risk Analysis with respect to each Securities Depository in that country within a reasonably practicable time after the addition of the country to Appendix B.

  • Escrow Analysis If applicable, with respect to each Mortgage Loan, the Seller has within the last twelve months (unless such Mortgage was originated within such twelve month period) analyzed the required Escrow Payments for each Mortgage and adjusted the amount of such payments so that, assuming all required payments are timely made, any deficiency will be eliminated on or before the first anniversary of such analysis, or any overage will be refunded to the Mortgagor, in accordance with RESPA and any other applicable law;

  • Sampling and Analysis The sampling and analysis of the coal delivered hereunder shall be performed by Buyer upon delivery of the coal to Buyer’s facility, and the results thereof shall be accepted and used as defining the quality and characteristics of the coal delivered under this Agreement and as the Payment Analysis. All analyses shall be made in Buyer’s laboratory at Buyer’s expense in accordance with ASTM standards where applicable, or industry-accepted standards in other cases. Samples for analyses shall be taken in accordance with ASTM standards or other methods mutually acceptable to both parties. Seller shall transmit its “as loaded” quality analysis to Buyer as soon as possible. Seller’s “as-loaded” quality shall be the Payment Analysis only when Buyer’s sampler and/or scales are inoperable, or if Buyer fails to obtain a sample upon unloading. Seller represents that it is familiar with Buyer’s sampling and analysis practices, and that it finds them to be acceptable. Buyer shall notify Seller in writing of any significant changes in Buyer’s sampling and analysis practices. Any such changes in Buyer’s sampling and analysis practices shall, except for ASTM or industry-accepted changes in practices, provide for no less accuracy than the sampling and analysis practices existing at the time of the execution of this Agreement, unless the Parties otherwise mutually agree. Each sample taken by Buyer shall be divided into four (4) parts and put into airtight containers, properly labeled and sealed. One (1) part shall be used for analysis by Buyer. One (1) part shall be used by Buyer as a check sample, if Buyer in its sole judgment determines it is XXXXXXXXX COAL COMPANY, INC. LG&E/KU Xxxxxxxx Xx. X00000 necessary. One (1) part shall be retained by Buyer until thirty (30) days after the sample is taken (“Disposal Date”), and shall be delivered to Seller for analysis if Seller so requests before the Disposal Date. One (1) part (the “Referee Sample”) shall be retained by Buyer until the Disposal Date. Seller shall be given copies of all analyses made by Buyer by the fifth (5th) business day of the month following the month of unloading. In addition, Buyer shall send Seller weekly analyses of coal unloaded at Buyer’s facilities. Seller, on reasonable notice to Buyer, shall have the right to have a representative present to observe the sampling and analyses performed by Buyer, Unless Seller requests an analysis of the Referee Sample before the Disposal Date, Buyer’s analysis shall be used to determine the quality of the coal delivered hereunder and shall be the Payment Analysis. The Monthly Weighted Averages of specifications referenced in §6.1 shall be based on the individual Shipment analyses. If any dispute arises with regard to the analysis of any sample before the Disposal Date for such sample, the Referee Sample retained by Buyer shall be submitted for analysis to an independent commercial testing laboratory (“Independent Lab”) mutually chosen by Buyer and Seller. For each coal quality specification in question, if the analysis of the Independent Lab differs by more than the applicable ASTM reproducibility standards, the Independent Lab results will govern, and the prior analysis shall be disregarded. All testing of the Referee Sample by the Independent Lab shall be at requestor’s expense unless the Independent Lab results differ from the original Payment Analysis for any specification by more than the applicable ASTM reproducibility standards as to that specification. In such case, the cost of the analysis made by the Independent Lab shall be borne by the party who provided the original Payment Analysis. XXXXXXXXX COAL COMPANY, INC. LG&E/KU Contract No. J14004

  • Research Analyst Independence The Company acknowledges that the Underwriters’ research analysts and research departments are required to be independent from their respective investment banking divisions and are subject to certain regulations and internal policies, and that such Underwriters’ research analysts may hold views and make statements or investment recommendations and/or publish research reports with respect to the Company and/or the offering that differ from the views of their respective investment banking divisions. The Company hereby waives and releases, to the fullest extent permitted by law, any claims that the Company may have against the Underwriters with respect to any conflict of interest that may arise from the fact that the views expressed by their independent research analysts and research departments may be different from or inconsistent with the views or advice communicated to the Company by such Underwriters’ investment banking divisions. The Company acknowledges that each of the Underwriters is a full service securities firm and as such from time to time, subject to applicable securities laws, may effect transactions for its own account or the account of its customers and hold long or short positions in debt or equity securities of the companies that may be the subject of the transactions contemplated by this Agreement.

  • Independent Analysis Each Party hereby confirms that its decision to execute this Agreement has been based upon its independent assessment of documents and information available to it, as it has deemed appropriate.

  • Technology Research Analyst Job# 1810 General Characteristics Maintains a strong understanding of the enterprise’s IT systems and architectures. Assists in the analysis of the requirements for the enterprise and applying emerging technologies to support long-term business objectives. Responsible for researching, collecting, and disseminating information on emerging technologies and key learnings throughout the enterprise. Researches and recommends changes to foundation architecture. Supports research projects to identify and evaluate emerging technologies. Interfaces with users and staff to evaluate possible implementation of the new technology in the enterprise, consistent with the goal of improving existing systems and technologies and in meeting the needs of the business. Analyzes and researches process of deployment and assists in this process.

  • Investment Analysis and Implementation In carrying out its obligations under Section 1 hereof, the Advisor shall:

  • Disturbance Analysis Data Exchange The Parties will cooperate with one another and the NYISO in the analysis of disturbances to either the Large Generating Facility or the New York State Transmission System by gathering and providing access to any information relating to any disturbance, including information from disturbance recording equipment, protective relay targets, breaker operations and sequence of events records, and any disturbance information required by Good Utility Practice.

  • SERVICE MONITORING, ANALYSES AND ORACLE SOFTWARE 11.1 We continuously monitor the Services to facilitate Oracle’s operation of the Services; to help resolve Your service requests; to detect and address threats to the functionality, security, integrity, and availability of the Services as well as any content, data, or applications in the Services; and to detect and address illegal acts or violations of the Acceptable Use Policy. Oracle monitoring tools do not collect or store any of Your Content residing in the Services, except as needed for such purposes. Oracle does not monitor, and does not address issues with, non-Oracle software provided by You or any of Your Users that is stored in, or run on or through, the Services. Information collected by Oracle monitoring tools (excluding Your Content) may also be used to assist in managing Oracle’s product and service portfolio, to help Oracle address deficiencies in its product and service offerings, and for license management purposes.

  • Investment Analysis and Commentary The Subadviser will provide quarterly performance analysis and market commentary (the “Investment Report”) during the term of this Agreement. The Investment Reports are due within 10 days after the end of each quarter. In addition, interim Investment Reports shall be issued at such times as may be mutually agreed upon by the Adviser and Subadviser; provided however, that any such interim Investment Report will be due within 10 days of the end of the month in which such agreement is reached between the Adviser and Subadviser. The subject of each Investment Report shall be mutually agreed upon. The Adviser is freely able to publicly distribute the Investment Report.

Time is Money Join Law Insider Premium to draft better contracts faster.