| Ref ID | 365 |
| First Author | N. Terrin |
| Journal | JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY |
| Year Of Publishing | 2005 |
| URL | https://www.jclinepi.com/article/S0895-4356(05)00082-X/fulltext |
| Keywords |
• Heterogeneity • Publication bias • General medical |
| Problem(s) |
• Inadequate analysis of heterogeneity • Poor consideration of publication bias |
| Article Type | Empirical |
| Article Subtype | Survey/questionnaire of authors opinions/practices |
| First Author Country | United States |
| Aim | To assess whether medical researchers can correctly identify publication bias from visual inspection of funnel plots in typical-size systematic reviews. |
| Level of Investigation | Descriptive |
| Summary of Findings | On average, 41 medical researchers correctly identified 52.5% (95% CI 50.6–54.4%) of the funnel plots as being affected or unaffected by publication bias. The weighted mean percent correct, which adjusted for the fact that asymmetric plots are more likely to occur in the presence of publication bias, was also low (48.3 to 62.8%, depending on the presence or absence of publication bias and heterogeneous study effects). Researchers who assess for publication bias using the funnel plot may be misled by its shape. |
| Number of systematic reviews included | 10 |
| Number of eligible systematic reviews assessed | 10 |
| Treatment impacted | No |
| Treatment impacted description | |
| Interpretation impacted | Not Applicable |
| Interpretation impacted description |