Dies ist eine Übersichtsseite mit Metadaten zu dieser wissenschaftlichen Arbeit. Der vollständige Artikel ist beim Verlag verfügbar.
Quantifying Publication Bias in Meta-Analysis
1.606
Zitationen
2
Autoren
2017
Jahr
Abstract
Publication bias is a serious problem in systematic reviews and meta-analyses, which can affect the validity and generalization of conclusions. Currently, approaches to dealing with publication bias can be distinguished into two classes: selection models and funnel-plot-based methods. Selection models use weight functions to adjust the overall effect size estimate and are usually employed as sensitivity analyses to assess the potential impact of publication bias. Funnel-plot-based methods include visual examination of a funnel plot, regression and rank tests, and the nonparametric trim and fill method. Although these approaches have been widely used in applications, measures for quantifying publication bias are seldom studied in the literature. Such measures can be used as a characteristic of a meta-analysis; also, they permit comparisons of publication biases between different meta-analyses. Egger's regression intercept may be considered as a candidate measure, but it lacks an intuitive interpretation. This article introduces a new measure, the skewness of the standardized deviates, to quantify publication bias. This measure describes the asymmetry of the collected studies' distribution. In addition, a new test for publication bias is derived based on the skewness. Large sample properties of the new measure are studied, and its performance is illustrated using simulations and three case studies.
Ähnliche Arbeiten
The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews
2021 · 90.765 Zit.
Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement
2009 · 83.089 Zit.
The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical Data
1977 · 78.048 Zit.
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement
2009 · 63.587 Zit.
Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses
2003 · 62.236 Zit.