| name | pairwise-synthesis |
| description | Compare two methods across multiple studies — paired meta-analysis protocol design. Budget: 30 studies, 30 effect sizes, 40 web searches. |
Pairwise Synthesis Strategy
Design a pairwise meta-analysis protocol comparing method A vs method B across multiple independent studies.
Purpose
When two methods (interventions, algorithms, approaches) have been compared across multiple studies, synthesize the evidence into a single quantitative estimate of relative performance. This strategy produces the complete protocol — stopping before computation.
Budget
| Resource | Floor | Target |
|---|
| Studies identified | 20 | 30 |
| Effect sizes extracted | 20 | 30 |
| Web searches | 25 | 40 |
| Quality assessments | 15 | 30 |
Budget gate: cannot exit until 80% of floor met.
State Ledger
<HARD-GATE>
| Metric | Current | Floor | Target | Status |
|--------|---------|-------|--------|--------|
| Studies found | 0 | 20 | 30 | BLOCKED |
| Effect sizes planned | 0 | 20 | 30 | BLOCKED |
| Web searches done | 0 | 25 | 40 | BLOCKED |
| Quality assessed | 0 | 15 | 30 | BLOCKED |
</HARD-GATE>
Available Tactics
| Tactic | When to Use |
|---|
| effect-size-extraction | After study identification, extract paired effect sizes |
| quality-assessment-protocol | Assess RoB for each included study |
| evidence-synthesis-planning | After extraction, plan the statistical model |
Available SOPs
| SOP | When to Use |
|---|
| pico-formulation | First — frame the comparison question |
| inclusion-criteria-design | After PICO — define what studies qualify |
| effect-size-planning | Determine which effect size metric to use |
| data-extraction-form | Design the extraction template |
| risk-of-bias-assessment | Per-study quality assessment |
| sensitivity-analysis-design | Plan robustness checks |
| publication-bias-assessment | Assess reporting bias |
| meta-analysis-synthesis | Final protocol assembly |
Execution Guidance
- Frame — Run
pico-formulation to structure the comparison
- Scope — Run
inclusion-criteria-design to define eligibility
- Search — Use dare-scholar and dare-ss to find candidate studies
- Extract — Use
effect-size-extraction tactic for each study
- Assess — Use
quality-assessment-protocol tactic for bias risk
- Plan — Use
evidence-synthesis-planning tactic for model selection
- Synthesize — Run
meta-analysis-synthesis to produce protocol
Iterate steps 3-5 until budget floor is met. Check state ledger before each iteration.
Output Format
protocol:
question: [PICO-structured question]
inclusion_criteria: [eligibility rules]
studies_included: [list with metadata]
effect_size_type: [SMD/OR/RR/MD]
model: [fixed-effect/random-effects]
heterogeneity_plan: [I2, tau2, subgroup, meta-regression]
sensitivity_plan: [leave-one-out, influence diagnostics]
bias_assessment_plan: [funnel plot, Egger's, trim-and-fill]
reporting: PRISMA-2020
