Dies ist eine Übersichtsseite mit Metadaten zu dieser wissenschaftlichen Arbeit. Der vollständige Artikel ist beim Verlag verfügbar.
Do dental research journals publish only positive results? A retrospective assessment of publication bias
4
Zitationen
3
Autoren
2018
Jahr
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The study aimed to determine the presence of publication bias in the top five dental journals with high impact factor published during 2007-2016. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The journals included are Journal of Clinical Periodontology, Dental Materials, Clinical Oral Implant Research (COIR), Journal of Endodontics, and Journal of Dental Research (JDR). The content of these journals was hand searched by two authors for scouring the proportion of positive or negative results. Articles showing two outcomes (primary and secondary) were registered depending on the primary result. RESULTS: The present study revealed higher percentage of statistically significant results in the published dental literature. Of five journals, JDR has shown fewer tendencies toward publication of nonsignificant results, whereas COIR has evidenced the highest publication of nonsignificant results. The journals with higher impact factor showed significantly different acceptance rate for research with positive results. However, year-wise publication (2007-2016) did not depict any significant difference. CONCLUSION: In dental research journals, articles with positive results are finding a better way in getting published compared to articles with negative results.
Ähnliche Arbeiten
The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews
2021 · 89.363 Zit.
Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement
2009 · 83.028 Zit.
The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical Data
1977 · 77.774 Zit.
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement
2009 · 63.389 Zit.
Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses
2003 · 62.057 Zit.