Current Research

Cost-Effectiveness of Women’s Vaccination Against HPV: Results for the Czech Republic

Luskova Martina, Bortnikova Kseniya

IES working paper.

Abstract:

This paper approaches the cost-effectiveness of women’s vaccination against human papillomaviruses (HPV) in the Czech Republic. HPV is a pathogen responsible for the majority of diagnosed cervical carcinomas. We assess the current reimbursement setting of HPV vaccination compared to the designed change. A homogeneous multistate Markov model approximates the transition among states representing the stages of progression of cervical carcinoma. For transition analysis, we utilise the data collected for healthcare reimbursement under public health insurance. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio suggests that increased immunisation coverage (from 65.8% to 80%) is cost-effective assuming the threshold of 1.2 million CZK per quality-adjusted life year. Increasing the vaccination coverage together with extending the age (from 13 up to 15) at which vaccination is reimbursed delivers an analogous outcome. Despite the limitations, the increased immunisation coverage of women’s vaccination against HPV is cost-effective. Therefore, we recommend to implement the corresponding policy change.

PDF, code, and data are available here

A Comment on “A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of the Evidence on Learning During the COVID-19 Pandemic”

Buliskeria Nino, Eliminejad Ali, Havranek Tomas, Irsova Zuzana, Jurajda Stepan, Kapicka Marek, Luskova Martina

IES working paper

Abstract:

Betthäuser et al. (2023) examine the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on the learning progress of school-aged children. They collect 291 estimates from 42 studies. Their meta-analysis-corrected estimate implies a substantial decline in students’ learning (Cohen’s d = −0.14, 95% confidence interval −0.17 to −0.10). First, we successfully reproduce the main results and the majority of supporting figures. Second, we provide additional analysis addressing publication bias by implementing correction techniques: PET-PEESE (funnelbased), 3PSM (selection model), and RoBMA (model averaging). Additionally, we implement novel approaches that account for the strength of biased selection favoring affirmative results in the sample of analyzed studies. Third, we use techniques that assume the presence of p-hacking (MAIVE, RTMA). Using these methods, the corrected effect ranges from −0.25 to −0.11 with high statistical significance. While our analysis does reveal some evidence of publication bias and p-hacking, these phenomena do not appear to systematically distort the overall findings of the original study.

PDF is available here

Effect of Exercise on Cognition, Memory, and Executive Function: A Study-Level Meta-Meta-Analysis Across Populations and Exercise Categories

Bartos Frantisek, Luskova Martina, Bortnikova Kseniya, Hozova Karolina, Kantova Klara, Irsova Zuzana, Havranek Tomas

PsyArXiv pre-print

Abstract:

Physical exercise is widely believed to enhance cognition, yet evidence from meta-analysesremains mixed. Here we compile a study-level dataset of 2,239 effect-size estimates from215 meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials examining the effect of exercise ongeneral cognition, memory, and executive functions. We find strong evidence of selectivereporting and large between-study heterogeneity. Analyses adjusted for publication biasreveal average effects much smaller than commonly reported (general cognition:standardized mean difference, SMD, = 0.227, 95% credible interval 0.116 to 0.330; memory:SMD = 0.027, 95% credible interval 0.000 to 0.227; executive functions: SMD = 0.012, 95%credible interval 0.000 to 0.147), along with wide prediction intervals spanning bothnegative and positive effects. Subgroup analyses identify specific population-interventioncombinations with more consistent benefits. Overall, broad claims of generalized cognitiveenhancement resulting from physical exercise appear premature; the evidence supportstargeted, population- and intervention-specific recommendations.

PDF, code, and data are available here

Do Two Wrongs Make a Right? Publication and Attenuation Biases in Economics

Ioannidis John, Buliskeria Nino, Doucouliagos Chris, Elminejad Ali, Havranek Tomas, Irsova Zuzana, Luskova Martina, Stanley T. D.

PAP is available here

Bias-Correction Methods in Meta-Analysis: Prevalence and Effect on Estimates

Ioannidis John, Luskova Martina, Pardal Joanna

Disentangling p-Hacking and Publication Bias

Buliskeria Nino, Eliminejad Ali, Havranek Tomas, Irsova Zuzana, Luskova Martina

Publication bias and p-hacking in the effect of COVID-19 on learning

Luskova Martina, Buliskeria Nino, Eliminejad Ali, Havranek Tomas, Irsova Zuzana, Jurajda Stepan, Kapicka Marek

Guidance for the Use of AI in the Meta-Analysis of Economics Research

Cook Nikolai, Bartos Frantisek, Bom Pedro R. D., Gechert Sebastian, Kantova Klara, Geyer-Klingeberg Jerome,

Havranek Tomas, Irsova Zuzana, Luskova Martina, Opatrny Matej, Prante Franz, Rachinger Heiko J., Stanley T. D.

Reporting Guidelines for Meta-Analysis in Economics - Updated for AI

Cook Nikolai, Bartos Frantisek, Bom Pedro R. D., Gechert Sebastian, Kantova Klara, Geyer-Klingeberg Jerome,

Havranek Tomas, Irsova Zuzana, Luskova Martina, Opatrny Matej, Prante Franz, Rachinger Heiko J., Stanley T. D.