| Ref ID | 658 |
| First Author | L. M. Spineli |
| Journal | RESEARCH SYNTHESIS METHODS |
| Year Of Publishing | 2017 |
| URL | https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdfdirect/10.1002/jrsm.1268?download=true |
| Keywords |
• Cochrane • Campbell • General medical • Missing data • Error |
| Problem(s) |
• Failure to address missing outcome data in analyses • Data extraction errors and double counting |
| Article Type | Empirical |
| Article Subtype | Meta-epidemiological analysis |
| First Author Country | Germany |
| Aim | Aims to examine the impact on the summary statistics from meta-analyses when missing outcome data from unclear or unaccceptable data extraction are imputed |
| Level of Investigation | Analytical |
| Summary of Findings | More than half of 113 eligible Cochrane meta‐analyses were evaluated as “unclearly” extracted (53%); 42 (37%) were “unacceptably” extracted and only 11 (10%) were “acceptably” extracted. The direct implication of “unclear” extraction is unnecessary inflation in uncertainty of estimated odds ratio irrespective of method used to address missingness. |
| Number of systematic reviews included | 113 |
| Number of eligible systematic reviews assessed | 113 |
| Treatment impacted | Yes |
| Treatment impacted description | |
| Interpretation impacted | No |
| Interpretation impacted description |