Lucija Batinovic

🔎 Low-tech examples for building and sharing open and reproducible search strategies for systematic reviews

elucidatescience.netlify.app/posts/search...

Glad to see Elsevier is investing in important things like suggesting readers that AI reads the articles for them. Nothing screams quality like claiming reading their articles is wasted time

Rice?

That’s not what it is??

Yeah it’s also difficult to see if there are lines close to the windshield, because to me it looks like the upper part of the trunk door is completely connected to the sides of the windshield so it cannot be opened.

What would this line be? Could it be an antenna from that angle?

“Missing link” as if all other links have already been figured out

I fucking love buying books.

Hi #openscience friends! As Psych-DS moves forward (stay tuned for an R package update...), we're applying in parallel for renewal of the NIH grant that funds this work.

If you (a) have NIH funding and (b) plan or would like to use Psych-DS for resulting datasets, please drop me a line!

ReplicationResearch.org is now open for submissions!

Submit replications and reproductions from many different fields, as well as conceptual contributions. With diamond OA, open and citable peer review reports, and reproducibility checks, we push the boundaries of open and fair publishing.

Picture of the book “Model to Meaning”

Putting high hopes in this one. Happy birthday to me 🥳

I think time is just a proxy for cognitive bandwidth

Feedback is very welcome, particularly if you spot mistakes or unclear interpretations!

Understanding how different parts of evidence synthesis inform the final result is crucial for trusting meta-analytic findings, which often carry more weight than single studies when it comes to shaping policies and opinions.

This post is an attempt to introduce meta-analytic concepts and relate them to the GRADE approach, using a few simple examples to show how different parts of a meta-analysis can inform different GRADE domains, which is something I often struggle with as it feels so subjective and nuanced.

Many meta-analyses in education research (and probably other fields outside of medicine), often overlook aspects such as heterogeneity, publication bias, and quality of evidence when drawing conclusions about the state of the field.

New post: connecting meta-analysis concepts with the GRADE framework for assessing certainty of evidence. elucidatescience.netlify.app/posts/ma-gra...

Thank you! I didn’t realize I had 4.6.0 because I recently updated packages so I assumed that was the latest version. Updating to 4.8.0 worked.

Is anyone else getting this error or am I missing something: Error: 'se' is not an exported object from 'namespace:metafor'?
#rstats @wviechtb.bsky.social

INSPECT-SR: a tool for assessing trustworthiness of randomised controlled trials The integrity of evidence synthesis is threatened by problematic randomised controlled trials (RCTs). These are RCTs where there are serious concerns about the trustworthiness of the data or findings....

www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1...

INSPECT-SR: A tool for assessing trustworthiness of randomised controlled trials.

Yet another example of original authors being allowed to say anything they want in replies to critiques unconstrained by verifiable facts.

Reply states we didn’t consider things we explicitly did, and says the original article never said things it explicitly did.

Read Jamie’s thread for details:

I wrote an R package that creates standardized R project structures that are compliant with @mekline.bsky.social's psych-DS...ish.

It also creates additional features for reproducibility and teaching like a readme, license, .gitignore and Quarto templates

+ can validate existing projects

ERROR @error.reviews was awarded a Commendation from the Society for the Improvement of Psychological Science!

For anyone who’s published systematic reviews, how often did you succeed in getting unpublished data by reaching out to authors? I don’t mean additional/IP data from published papers, but new data or data they could not get published. #evidencesynthesis

I asked with the same prompt and z-curve was not mentioned at all. I got too long of a reply but it mentioned:

Among commonly used tests, Peters’ test seems to strike a good balance:
– better power than Begg’s,
– lower false positive rate than Egger’s when heterogeneity is present.

A lot of discussions about open science in psychology happened on blogs. I have been archiving them and will make their content available. I remember 37 blogs (with 2827 posts!) but which blogs did I forget, and are not on my list? Please share and reply with any that are missing!

A Tale of Two Science Reform Movements Reflections from meetings of Metascience 2025 and the Society for the Improvement of Psychological Science

New post! "A Tale of Two Science Reform Movements," in which I compare the recent #Metascience2025 and #SIPS2025 conferences, and find that I am much more at home at one than the other. getsyeducated.substack.com/p/a-tale-of-...

Agreed, I feel like the overall direction of the entire conference felt too abstract and almost like it’s engaging in “meta-washing”

Agreed, I feel like the overall direction of the entire conference felt too abstract and almost like it’s engaging in “meta-washing”

Yes, very slow, no matter which browser used. It’s been like that since they had the crash…