Not that this solves any problem (don't remember where I saved it from), but good to keep in mind that everybody struggles... 😅

The "Standard Error error," which confuses SE and SD in computing effect sizes, is not uncommon, unfortunately. I've noticed those when re-analyzing some meta-analyses. It's actually easy for a meta-analyst to avoid such errors-- when an ES looks a bit too big to be true, re-examine your analysis.

Even with evidence to "solve the issues," though, self-correction is hard. A previous meta-analysis on third-person effect that we corrected got included in a meta-analysis book years after we published our paper. It is still cited, sometimes together with ours, which shows our paper wasn't read 😆