Merge branch 'main' into respond-reviews

supp_mat/SM3_ExplainingDeviation.qmd

@@ -54,7 +54,7 @@ fit_MA_mv <- function(effects_analysis, Z_colname, VZ_colname, estimate_type){
                                     data = effects_analysis)
   return(mod)
 }
-#TODO I don't think we need the forest function plotting in this document
+
 plot_forest <- function(data, intercept = TRUE, MA_mean = TRUE){
   if(MA_mean == FALSE){
     data <- filter(data, study_id != "overall")
@@ -104,7 +104,7 @@ plot_forest <- function(data, intercept = TRUE, MA_mean = TRUE){
   print(p)
 }
 
-#TODO I think we can delete this
+
 plot_forest_2 <- function(data, intercept = TRUE, MA_mean = TRUE){
   if(MA_mean == FALSE){
     data <- filter(data, study_id != "overall")
@@ -1085,8 +1085,6 @@ ManyEcoEvo_yi_viz %>%
 
 ## Deviation scores as explained by the distinctiveness of variables in each analysis
 
-### Effect Sizes $Z_r$ {#sec-sorensen-Zr}
-
 ### Out of sample predictions $y_i$ {#sec-sorensen-yi}
 
 Given the convergence and singularity issues encountered with most other analyses, we also checked for convergence and singularity issues in models of deviation explained by Sorensen's similarity index for $y_i$ estimates (@tbl-deviation-similarity-convergence-singularity-yi).