Un estudio exploratorio sobre el nivel de conocimiento sobre el tamaño del efecto y meta-análisis en psicólogos profesionales españoles
Resumen
El enfoque de la Práctica Basada en la Evidencia se basa en la utilización de la investigación científica en la toma de decisiones profesionales en un esfuerzo por producir los mejores servicios posibles en la práctica clínica. El nivel de conocimiento sobre los estadísticos del tamaño del efecto y estudios de meta-análisis puede afectar a las decisiones de los profesionales y poner en riesgo la calidad de las intervenciones psicológicas. Este trabajo recoge los resultados de una encuesta on line sobre el grado de conocimiento de estos tópicos entre psicólogos profesionales españoles. La muestra estuvo formada por 77 participantes (68.8% mujeres y 31.2% hombres), con una edad media de 41.44 años (DT=9.42), y un rango de edad de 25-64 años. Los resultados sugieren que la mayoría de los psicólogos encuestados no tenían un conocimiento adecuado sobre los índices de tamaño del efecto, los estudios de meta-análisis, y los listados de comprobación de la calidad metodológica de los estudios. Por lo tanto, es necesario mejorar la educación estadística de los psicólogos, la cual podría contribuir también en la mejora de la práctica profesional.
Citas
Algina, J., Keselman, H.J., y Penfield, R.D. (2005). An alternative to Cohen's standardized mean difference effect size: a robust parameter and confidence interval in the two independent groups case. Psychological Methods, 10, 17–328. doi:10.1037/1082-989X.10.3.317
American Psychological Association (2005). Policy Statement on Evidence-Based Practice in Psychology. Washington, DC: Author.
American Psychological Association (2006). Evidence-based practice in psychology: APA Presidential Task Force on evidence-based practice. American Psychologist, 61, 271– 285. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.61.4.271
American Psychological Association (2010). Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (6th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.
Anzures-Cabrera, J., y Higgins, J.P.T. (2010). Graphical displays for meta-analysis: An overview with suggestions for practice. Research Synthesis Methods, 1, 66-80. doi:10.1002/jrsm.6
Babione, J.M. (2010). Evidence-Based Practice in Psychology: An ethical framework for graduate education, clinical training, and maintaining professional competence. Ethics & Behavior, 20, 443-453. doi:10.1080/10508422.2010.521446
Badenes-Ribera, L. (2016). Tamaño del efecto y su intervalo de confianza y meta-análisis en Psicología. Tesis Doctoral con Mención Internacional. Univesitat de València.
Badenes-Ribera, L., Frías-Navarro, D., Monterde-i-Bort, H., y Pascual-Soler, M. (2013, Febrero). Informar e interpretar el tamaño del efecto en Psicología y Educación. Comunicación escrita presentada al XIV Congreso Virtual de Psiquiatria.com. Interpsiquis, Palma de Mallorca, Spain.
Badenes-Ribera, L., Frías-Navarro, D., Pascual-Soler, M., y Monterde-i-Bort, H. (2016). Knowledge level on effect size statistics, confidence intervals and meta-analysis in Spanish academic psychologists. Psicothema, 28, 448-456. doi:10.7334/psicothema2016.24
Banks, G.C., Kepes, S., y Banks, K.P. (2012). Publication bias: The antagonist of meta-analytic reviews and effective policymaking. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 34, 259–277. doi:10.3102/0162373712446144
Banks, G.C., y McDaniel, M.A. (2011). The kryptonite of evidence based I-O psychology. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 4, 40- 44. doi:10.1111/j.1754-9434.2010.01292.x.
Bauer, R.M. (2007). Evidence-based practice in Psychology: implications for research and research training. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 63, 685–694. doi:10.1002/jclp.20374
Beyth-Maron, R., Fidler, F., y Cumming, G. (2008). Statistical cognition: Towards evidence-based practice in statistics and statistics education. Statistics Education Research Journal, 7, 20-39.
Borenstein, M., Hedges, L.V., Higgins, J.P.T., y Rothstein, H. (2009). Introduction to Metaanalysis. Chichester: Wiley.
Botella, J., y Sánchez-Meca, J. (2015). Meta-análisis en Ciencias Sociales y de la Salud. Madrid, Spain: Síntesis.
Clarke, M., y Clarke, T. (2000). A study of the references used in Cochrane protocols and reviews. Three bibles, three dictionaries, and nearly 25,000 other things. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Heath Care, 16, 907-909.
Cumming, G. (2012). Understanding the new statistics: Effect sizes, confidence intervals, and meta-analysis. New York, NY: Routledge.
Cumming, G., Fidler, F., Kalinowski, P., y Lai, J. (2012). The statistical recommendations of the American Psychological Association publication manual: Effect sizes, confidence intervals, and meta-analysis. Australian Journal of Psychology, 64, 138-146. doi:10.1111/j.1742-9536.2011.00037.x
Daset, L.R., y Cracco, C. (2013). Psicología Basada en la Evidencia: algunas cuestiones básicas y una aproximación a través de una revisión bibliográfica. Ciencias Psicológicas, 7, 209- 220.
Erceg-Hurn, D.M., y Mirosevich, V.M. (2008). Modern robust statistical methods: An easy way to maximize the accuracy and power of your research. American Psychologist, 63, 591- 601. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.63.7.591
Faulkner, C., Fidler, F., y Cumming, G. (2008). The value of RCT evidence depends on the quality of statistical analysis. Behavior Research and Therapy, 46, 270-281. doi:10.1016/j.brat.2007.12.001
Ferguson, C.J. (2009). An effect size primer: a guide for clinicians and researchers. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 40, 532-538. doi:10.1037/a00158084
Ferguson, C.J., y Brannick, M.T. (2011). Publication bias in psychological science: Prevalence, methods for identifying and controlling, and implications for the use of meta-analyses. Psychological Methods, 17, 120–128. doi:10.1037/a0024445
Frías-Navarro, D., y Pascual-Llobell, J. (2003). Psicología clínica basada en pruebas: Efecto del tratamiento. Papeles del Psicólogo, 85, 11-118.
Grissom, R.J., y Kim, J.J. (2001). Review of assumptions and problems in the appropriate conceptualization of effect size. Psychological Methods, 6, 135-146. doi:10.1037/1082-989X.6.2.135
Grissom, R.J., y Kim, J.J. (2012). Effect sizes for research. New York, USA: Routledge.
Ioannidis, J.P.A. (2011). Meta-research: The art of getting it wrong. Research Synthesis Methods, 1, 169-184. doi:10.1002/jrsm.19
Kepes, S., Banks, G.C., y Oh, I.S. (2014). Avoiding bias in publication bias research: The value of "null" findings. Journal of Business and Psychology, 29, 183-203. doi: 10.1007/s10869-012-9279-0
Kicinski, M. (2013). Publication Bias in Recent Meta-Analyses. PLoSOne, 8(11), e81823.
Kicinski, M., Springate, D.A., y Kontopantelis, E. (2015). Publication bias in meta-analyses from the Cochrane Data base of Systematic Reviews. Statistics in Medicine, 34, 2781-2795. doi:10.1002/sim.6525
Kline, R.B. (2013). Beyond significance testing: Statistic reform in the behavioral sciences. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association: Washington, DC.
Newcombe, R.G. (2012). Confidence Intervals for Proportions and Related Mesuares of Efect Size. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
Peng, C.Y.J., y Chen, L.T. (2014). Beyond Cohen's d: alternative effect size measures for between subject designs. The Journal of Experimental Education, 82, 22-50. doi:10.1080/00220973.2012.745471
Rothstein, H.R., Sutton, A.J., y Borenstein, M. (Eds.) (2005). Publication bias in meta-analysis: Prevention, assessment, and adjustments. New York, NY: Wiley. doi:10.1002/0470870168
Sánchez-Meca, J., Boruch, R.F., Petrosino, A., y Rosa-Alcázar, A.I. (2002). La Colaboración Campbell y la Práctica basada en la Evidencia. Papeles del Psicólogo, 83, 44-48.
Sánchez-Meca, J., y Marín-Martínez, F. (2010). Meta-analysis in psychological research. International Journal of Psychological Research, 3, 150-162.
Spring, B. (2007). Evidence-based practice in clinical psychology: What it is, why it matters; what you need to know. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 63, 611-631. doi:10.1002/jclip.20373
Sterne, J.A., Gavaghan, D., y Egger, M. (2005). The funnel plot. En H.R. Rothstein, A.J. Sutton, y M. Borenstein (Eds.), Publication bias in metaanalysis: Prevention, assessment and adjustments (pp. 75–98). Chichester, UK: Wiley.
Torgerson, C.J. (2006). Publication bias: The Achilles’ heel of systematic reviews? British Journal of Educational Studies, 54, 89–102. doi:110.1111/j.1467-8527.2006.00332.x.
Walker, B.B., y London, S. (2007). Novel tools and resources for evidence-based practice in Psychology. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 63, 633-642. doi:10.1002/jclp.20377
Wang, Z., y Thompson, B. (2007). Is the Pearson r2 biased, and if so, what is the best correction formula? Journal of Experimental Education, 75, 109–125. doi:10.3200/JEXE.75.2.109- 125
American Psychological Association (2005). Policy Statement on Evidence-Based Practice in Psychology. Washington, DC: Author.
American Psychological Association (2006). Evidence-based practice in psychology: APA Presidential Task Force on evidence-based practice. American Psychologist, 61, 271– 285. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.61.4.271
American Psychological Association (2010). Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (6th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.
Anzures-Cabrera, J., y Higgins, J.P.T. (2010). Graphical displays for meta-analysis: An overview with suggestions for practice. Research Synthesis Methods, 1, 66-80. doi:10.1002/jrsm.6
Babione, J.M. (2010). Evidence-Based Practice in Psychology: An ethical framework for graduate education, clinical training, and maintaining professional competence. Ethics & Behavior, 20, 443-453. doi:10.1080/10508422.2010.521446
Badenes-Ribera, L. (2016). Tamaño del efecto y su intervalo de confianza y meta-análisis en Psicología. Tesis Doctoral con Mención Internacional. Univesitat de València.
Badenes-Ribera, L., Frías-Navarro, D., Monterde-i-Bort, H., y Pascual-Soler, M. (2013, Febrero). Informar e interpretar el tamaño del efecto en Psicología y Educación. Comunicación escrita presentada al XIV Congreso Virtual de Psiquiatria.com. Interpsiquis, Palma de Mallorca, Spain.
Badenes-Ribera, L., Frías-Navarro, D., Pascual-Soler, M., y Monterde-i-Bort, H. (2016). Knowledge level on effect size statistics, confidence intervals and meta-analysis in Spanish academic psychologists. Psicothema, 28, 448-456. doi:10.7334/psicothema2016.24
Banks, G.C., Kepes, S., y Banks, K.P. (2012). Publication bias: The antagonist of meta-analytic reviews and effective policymaking. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 34, 259–277. doi:10.3102/0162373712446144
Banks, G.C., y McDaniel, M.A. (2011). The kryptonite of evidence based I-O psychology. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 4, 40- 44. doi:10.1111/j.1754-9434.2010.01292.x.
Bauer, R.M. (2007). Evidence-based practice in Psychology: implications for research and research training. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 63, 685–694. doi:10.1002/jclp.20374
Beyth-Maron, R., Fidler, F., y Cumming, G. (2008). Statistical cognition: Towards evidence-based practice in statistics and statistics education. Statistics Education Research Journal, 7, 20-39.
Borenstein, M., Hedges, L.V., Higgins, J.P.T., y Rothstein, H. (2009). Introduction to Metaanalysis. Chichester: Wiley.
Botella, J., y Sánchez-Meca, J. (2015). Meta-análisis en Ciencias Sociales y de la Salud. Madrid, Spain: Síntesis.
Clarke, M., y Clarke, T. (2000). A study of the references used in Cochrane protocols and reviews. Three bibles, three dictionaries, and nearly 25,000 other things. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Heath Care, 16, 907-909.
Cumming, G. (2012). Understanding the new statistics: Effect sizes, confidence intervals, and meta-analysis. New York, NY: Routledge.
Cumming, G., Fidler, F., Kalinowski, P., y Lai, J. (2012). The statistical recommendations of the American Psychological Association publication manual: Effect sizes, confidence intervals, and meta-analysis. Australian Journal of Psychology, 64, 138-146. doi:10.1111/j.1742-9536.2011.00037.x
Daset, L.R., y Cracco, C. (2013). Psicología Basada en la Evidencia: algunas cuestiones básicas y una aproximación a través de una revisión bibliográfica. Ciencias Psicológicas, 7, 209- 220.
Erceg-Hurn, D.M., y Mirosevich, V.M. (2008). Modern robust statistical methods: An easy way to maximize the accuracy and power of your research. American Psychologist, 63, 591- 601. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.63.7.591
Faulkner, C., Fidler, F., y Cumming, G. (2008). The value of RCT evidence depends on the quality of statistical analysis. Behavior Research and Therapy, 46, 270-281. doi:10.1016/j.brat.2007.12.001
Ferguson, C.J. (2009). An effect size primer: a guide for clinicians and researchers. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 40, 532-538. doi:10.1037/a00158084
Ferguson, C.J., y Brannick, M.T. (2011). Publication bias in psychological science: Prevalence, methods for identifying and controlling, and implications for the use of meta-analyses. Psychological Methods, 17, 120–128. doi:10.1037/a0024445
Frías-Navarro, D., y Pascual-Llobell, J. (2003). Psicología clínica basada en pruebas: Efecto del tratamiento. Papeles del Psicólogo, 85, 11-118.
Grissom, R.J., y Kim, J.J. (2001). Review of assumptions and problems in the appropriate conceptualization of effect size. Psychological Methods, 6, 135-146. doi:10.1037/1082-989X.6.2.135
Grissom, R.J., y Kim, J.J. (2012). Effect sizes for research. New York, USA: Routledge.
Ioannidis, J.P.A. (2011). Meta-research: The art of getting it wrong. Research Synthesis Methods, 1, 169-184. doi:10.1002/jrsm.19
Kepes, S., Banks, G.C., y Oh, I.S. (2014). Avoiding bias in publication bias research: The value of "null" findings. Journal of Business and Psychology, 29, 183-203. doi: 10.1007/s10869-012-9279-0
Kicinski, M. (2013). Publication Bias in Recent Meta-Analyses. PLoSOne, 8(11), e81823.
Kicinski, M., Springate, D.A., y Kontopantelis, E. (2015). Publication bias in meta-analyses from the Cochrane Data base of Systematic Reviews. Statistics in Medicine, 34, 2781-2795. doi:10.1002/sim.6525
Kline, R.B. (2013). Beyond significance testing: Statistic reform in the behavioral sciences. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association: Washington, DC.
Newcombe, R.G. (2012). Confidence Intervals for Proportions and Related Mesuares of Efect Size. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
Peng, C.Y.J., y Chen, L.T. (2014). Beyond Cohen's d: alternative effect size measures for between subject designs. The Journal of Experimental Education, 82, 22-50. doi:10.1080/00220973.2012.745471
Rothstein, H.R., Sutton, A.J., y Borenstein, M. (Eds.) (2005). Publication bias in meta-analysis: Prevention, assessment, and adjustments. New York, NY: Wiley. doi:10.1002/0470870168
Sánchez-Meca, J., Boruch, R.F., Petrosino, A., y Rosa-Alcázar, A.I. (2002). La Colaboración Campbell y la Práctica basada en la Evidencia. Papeles del Psicólogo, 83, 44-48.
Sánchez-Meca, J., y Marín-Martínez, F. (2010). Meta-analysis in psychological research. International Journal of Psychological Research, 3, 150-162.
Spring, B. (2007). Evidence-based practice in clinical psychology: What it is, why it matters; what you need to know. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 63, 611-631. doi:10.1002/jclip.20373
Sterne, J.A., Gavaghan, D., y Egger, M. (2005). The funnel plot. En H.R. Rothstein, A.J. Sutton, y M. Borenstein (Eds.), Publication bias in metaanalysis: Prevention, assessment and adjustments (pp. 75–98). Chichester, UK: Wiley.
Torgerson, C.J. (2006). Publication bias: The Achilles’ heel of systematic reviews? British Journal of Educational Studies, 54, 89–102. doi:110.1111/j.1467-8527.2006.00332.x.
Walker, B.B., y London, S. (2007). Novel tools and resources for evidence-based practice in Psychology. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 63, 633-642. doi:10.1002/jclp.20377
Wang, Z., y Thompson, B. (2007). Is the Pearson r2 biased, and if so, what is the best correction formula? Journal of Experimental Education, 75, 109–125. doi:10.3200/JEXE.75.2.109- 125
Sección
Artículos
Esta obra está bajo licencia internacional Creative Commons Reconocimiento-NoComercial-SinObrasDerivadas 4.0.
Licencia Creative Commons
Reconocimiento – NoComercial – SinObraDerivada (by-nc-nd): No se permite un uso comercial de la obra original ni la generación de obras derivadas.
© European Journal of investigation in Health, Psychology and Education
