Meta-analyses are the gold standard for synthesizing the results of individual studies and are highly relevant in psychotherapy research in order to obtain precise effect size estimates of the efficacy of interventions with sufficient power. However, meta-analyses provide valid results only if there is no bias in the underlying data and no heterogeneity in the results. The aims of the research synthesis division are the conduction of meta-analyses on the efficacy of psychotherapeutic treatments and the assessment of heterogeneity and publication bias.
Niemeyer, H.*, van Aert, R.C.M.*, Schmidt, S., Uelsmann, D., Knaevelsrud, C. & Schulte-Herbrueggen, O. (2020). Publication Bias in Meta-Analyses of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Interventions. Meta-Psychology, 4.
* shared first autorship
Schumacher, S.*, Niemeyer, H.*, Engel, S., Cwik, J.C., Laufer, S., Klusmann, H. & Knaevelsrud, C. (2019). HPA axis regulation in posttraumatic stress disorder: A meta-analysis focusing on potential moderators. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 100, 35-57. doi: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2019.02.005
Wessel, I., & Niemeyer, H. (2019). We need to change our attitude, and journals can help: Reflections in response to Spiller & Olff (2018), European Journal of Psychotraumatology, 10(1), 1614823, doi: 10.1080/20008198.2019.1614823
Niemeyer, H., Musch, J., & Pietrowsky, R. (2013). Publication bias in meta-analyses of the efficacy of psychotherapeutic interventions for depression. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 81, 58-74. doi: 10.1037/a0031152
Niemeyer, H., Musch, J., & Pietrowsky, R. (2012). Publication bias in meta-analyses of the efficacy of psychotherapeutic interventions for schizophrenia. Schizophrenia Research, 138(2-3), 103–112. doi: 10.1016/j.schres.2012.03.023