I have conducted a systematic review and lme model of 50 studies attempting to economically value ecological services (previously un-valued). These studies do not use data samples or observations, instead they are using methods such as transferring the cost of artificial carbon production, or potential benefits from tourism to provide one or more $/hectare/year values per study (a total of 120 estimates). The overall goal is to establish whether method of valuation, or environmental factors explain the variance in these values.

The literature I have found on publication bias recommend regressing the t-ratio of each estimate against the remaining variables (e.g. Card and Krueger, 1995), but this seems reliant on the original studies using measured observations. I looked at the following question on this site, but no clear answer was given. Publication bias in meta-analysis of single case studies

Would forest and funnel plots be adequate in this situation if publication is the final goal?


closed as unclear what you're asking by mdewey, Michael Chernick, kjetil b halvorsen, Peter Flom Aug 26 '18 at 12:58

Please clarify your specific problem or add additional details to highlight exactly what you need. As it's currently written, it’s hard to tell exactly what you're asking. See the How to Ask page for help clarifying this question. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

  • $\begingroup$ Whenever you have a point effect estimate and a variability estimate (or sample size estimate), it is possible to appraise small study effects (a term which is preferred in general to publication bias). It is not clear whether you have both. Please, provide more data, and possibly the R data frame as well. $\endgroup$ – Joe_74 Mar 28 '16 at 23:30
  • $\begingroup$ I am voting to close this as unclear since the OP did not come back to clarify as had been requested in a comment. $\endgroup$ – mdewey Aug 15 '18 at 16:57