IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0034222.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Heavy Tailed Distributions of Effect Sizes in Systematic Reviews of Complex Interventions

Author

Listed:
  • Christopher Burton

Abstract

Background: Systematic reviews of complex interventions commonly find heterogeneity of effect sizes among similar interventions which cannot be explained. Commentators have suggested that complex interventions should be viewed as interventions in complex systems. We hypothesised that if this is the case, the distribution of effect sizes from complex interventions should be heavy tailed, as in other complex systems. Thus, apparent heterogeneity may be a feature of the complex systems in which such interventions operate. Methodology/Principal Findings: We specified three levels of complexity and identified systematic reviews which reported effect sizes of healthcare interventions at two of these levels (interventions to change professional practice and personal interventions to help smoking cessation). These were compared with each other and with simulated data representing the lowest level of complexity. Effect size data were rescaled across reviews at each level using log-normal parameters and pooled. Distributions were plotted and fitted against the inverse power law (Pareto) and stretched exponential (Weibull) distributions, heavy tailed distributions which are commonly reported in the literature, using maximum likelihood fitting. The dataset included 155 studies of interventions to change practice and 98 studies of helping smoking cessation. Both distributions showed a heavy tailed distribution which fitted best to the inverse power law for practice interventions (exponent = 3.9, loglikelihood = −35.3) and to the stretched exponential for smoking cessation (loglikelihood = −75.2). Bootstrap sensitivity analysis to adjust for possible publication bias against weak results did not diminish the goodness of fit. Conclusions/Significance: The distribution of effect sizes from complex interventions includes heavy tails as typically seen in both theoretical and empirical complex systems. This is in keeping with the idea of complex interventions as interventions in complex systems.

Suggested Citation

  • Christopher Burton, 2012. "Heavy Tailed Distributions of Effect Sizes in Systematic Reviews of Complex Interventions," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(3), pages 1-7, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0034222
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0034222
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0034222
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0034222&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0034222?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sean Horan & Paola Manzini & Marco Mariotti, 2018. "Precision May Harm: The Comparative Statics of Imprecise Judgement," Working Paper Series 1518, Department of Economics, University of Sussex Business School.
    2. Jiménez-Barbero, José Antonio & Ruiz-Hernández, José Antonio & Llor-Zaragoza, Laura & Pérez-García, María & Llor-Esteban, Bartolomé, 2016. "Effectiveness of anti-bullying school programs: A meta-analysis," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 165-175.
    3. Nina Bartelink & Patricia van Assema & Maria Jansen & Hans Savelberg & Stef Kremers, 2019. "The Moderating Role of the School Context on the Effects of the Healthy Primary School of the Future," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(13), pages 1-19, July.
    4. Horan, Sean & Manzini, Paola & Mariotti, Marco, 2022. "When is coarseness not a curse? Comparative statics of the coarse random utility model," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 202(C).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0034222. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.