Evaluation of the Normality Assumption in Meta-Analyses

Abstract

Abstract Random-effects meta-analysis is one of the mainstream methods for research synthesis. The heterogeneity in meta-analyses is usually assumed to follow a normal distribution. This is actually a strong assumption, but one that often receives little attention and is used without justification. Although methods for assessing the normality assumption are readily available, they cannot be used directly because the included studies have different within-study standard errors. Here we present a standardization framework for evaluation of the normality assumption and examine its performance in random-effects meta-analyses with simulation studies and real examples. We use both a formal statistical test and a quantile-quantile plot for visualization. Simulation studies show that our normality test has well-controlled type I error rates and reasonable power. We also illustrate the real-world significance of examining the normality assumption with examples. Investigating the normality assumption can provide valuable information for further analysis or clinical application. We recommend routine examination of the normality assumption with the proposed framework in future meta-analyses.