Most oxytocin administration studies are statistically underpowered to reliably detect (or reject) a wide range of effect sizes.

The neuropeptide oxytocin has attracted substantial research interest for its role in behaviour and cognition; however, the evidence for its effects have been mixed. Meta-analysis is viewed as the gold-standard for synthesizing evidence, but the evidential value of a meta-analysis is dependent on the evidential value of the studies it synthesizes, and the analytical approaches used to derive conclusions. To assess the evidential value of oxytocin administration meta-analyses, this study calculated the statistical power of 107 studies from 35 meta-analyses and assessed the statistical equivalence of reported results. The mean statistical power across all studies was 12.2% and there has been no noticeable improvement in power over an eight-year period. None of the 26 non-significant meta-analyses were statistically equivalent, assuming a smallest effect size of interest of 0.1. Altogether, most oxytocin treatment study designs are statistically underpowered to either detect or reject a wide range of worthwhile effect sizes.

Informations de copyright

© 2020 The Author(s).

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

The author declares that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.