| Ref ID | 70 |
| First Author | D. Herrmann |
| Journal | ANNALS OF ONCOLOGY |
| Year Of Publishing | 2017 |
| URL | https://www.annalsofoncology.org/article/S0923-7534(19)31999-4/pdf |
| Keywords |
• Oncology • Publication bias |
| Problem(s) |
• Poor consideration of publication bias |
| Article Type | Empirical |
| Article Subtype | Cross-sectional survey/Methodological systematic review |
| First Author Country | United States |
| Aim | To assess ways that systematic reviewers attempted to limit publication bias during the search process as well as the statistical methods used to evaluate it in systematic reviews from the top five highest impact factor oncology journals published between 2007 and 2015. |
| Level of Investigation | Descriptive |
| Summary of Findings | From the 182 included systematic reviews sampled from the top five highest impact factor oncology journals published between 2007 and 2015 publication bias assessments were not frequently used in oncology systematic reviews. 40% of systematic reviews (73/182) discussed publication bias and 28% of reviews (51/182) included an assessment of publication bias. Conference abstracts were the most commonly reported form of gray literature, followed by clinical trials registries. Fifty-one reviews reported publication bias evaluations. The most common method was the funnel plot (80%, 41/51) followed by Egger’s regression (59%, 30/51) and Begg’s test (43%, 22/51). |
| Number of systematic reviews included | 182 |
| Number of eligible systematic reviews assessed | 337 |