- Framework of problems / Comprehensive
- Poor consideration of publication bias
- Publication bias is underreported in systematic reviews published in high-impact-factor journals: metaepidemiologic study
Ref ID | 334 |
First Author | A. Onishi |
Journal | JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY |
Year Of Publishing | 2014 |
URL | https://www.jclinepi.com/article/S0895-4356(14)00274-1/fulltext |
Keywords |
Publication bias General medical |
Problem(s) |
Poor consideration of publication bias |
Number of systematic reviews included | 116 |
Summary of Findings | The assessment of publication bias was not reported in 31.0% of included reviews, particularly in reviews without a comprehensive literature search. Of these 36 reviews, seven (19.4%) were found to have a significant publication bias. The original pooled results may have been overestimated by a median of 50.9% if corrected for publication bias. Among the 28 reviews with publication bias including both reviews that did or did not report the assessment of publication bias, seven reviews (25.0%) did not report the presence of publication bias. |
Did the article find that the problem(s) led to qualitative changes in interpretation of the results? | Yes |
Are the methods of the article described in enough detail to replicate the study? | Yes |