Reproducibility of health claims in meta-analysis studies of COVID quarantine (stay-at-home) orders
S. Stanley Young, Warren B. Kindzierski

TL;DR
This study assesses the reproducibility of claims in meta-analyses on COVID quarantine effects, revealing concerns about research transparency and reliability in key health outcomes.
Contribution
It introduces a p-value plotting method to independently evaluate the reproducibility of meta-analyses in COVID research.
Findings
Three meta-analyses raise questions about quarantine benefits/risks
One meta-analysis on suicidal ideation is unreliable
Highlights issues of research transparency and reproducibility
Abstract
The coronavirus pandemic (COVID) has been an extraordinary test of modern government scientific procedures that inform and shape policy. Many governments implemented COVID quarantine (stay-at-home) orders on the notion that this nonpharmaceutical intervention would delay and flatten the epidemic peak and largely benefit public health outcomes. The overall research capacity response to COVID since late 2019 has been massive. Given lack of research transparency, only a small fraction of published research has been judged by others to be reproducible before COVID. Independent evaluation of published meta-analysis on a common research question can be used to assess the reproducibility of a claim coming from that field of research. We used a p-value plotting statistical method to independently evaluate reproducibility of specific research claims made in four meta-analysis studies related to…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsCOVID-19 and Mental Health · COVID-19 epidemiological studies · COVID-19 Pandemic Impacts
MethodsTest
