Educational Course - Half Day (4 hours)
Timing
15 min lecture + 5 min for questions
Learning outcome
Understand the process of manually selecting and annotating studies to be included in a meta-analysis.
Points to cover
- Explain the continued utility of manual meta-analyses, even with a wealth of high-quality, automated tools.
- Describe some past manual meta-analyses that were important in the field and illustrate several different methods, including some well-done meta-analyses with inconclusive results.
- Briefly outline the steps and options for manually selecting and annotating studies (including, for example, the role of metaCurious and NeuroVault).
- Introduce the idea of “semi-automated” meta-analyses, leveraging tools like Neurosynth, NeuroVault, and metaCurious.
- Explain why it’s important to share results images instead of just reporting peak coordinates.
Interactive components
- Start with a poll asking which exclusion criteria seem necessary for doing a meta-analysis, including some criteria that could bias the results.
- Later, ask participants to do something easy on MetaCurious, PubMed, or NeuroVault (e.g., start a search string).
- We will conclude with 5 minutes for participant questions.