ReviewPublication Bias: A Brief Review for Clinicians
Section snippets
PUBLICATION BIAS
A systematic review follows a protocol describing the scope of the question, criteria for inclusion and exclusion of primary studies, a search strategy, data extraction, quality assessment procedures, and data analysis. Bias can intrude at any of these steps. Perhaps the most difficult form of bias for reviewers to overcome is publication bias, which influences the selection of studies for inclusion in the review. Publication bias follows from the selective publication of manuscripts based on
DETECTING PUBLICATION BIAS
Since even comprehensive efforts may fail to identify all unpublished studies, reviewers may conduct procedures designed to determine the likelihood that publication bias is influencing their results. These methods may be graphical (the funnel plot and the trim-and-fill method) or analytical (fail-safe N, sensitivity analysis, and prospective registry).
An estimated treatment effect is more precise (has a narrower confidence interval) in a study with a larger number of patient events compared
PREVENTING PUBLICATION BIAS
Prospective study registration with accessible results is likely to represent the best solution. Proposals exist to link prospective registration to the work of institutional review boards or ethics review boards40 or to the editorial process of medical journals and publishing societies.41 Some pharmaceutical companies have made their research information available online.42 Some journals, like The Lancet, have established Web sites for posting study protocols and reports of completed studies
REFERENCES (43)
- et al.
Publication bias in clinical research
Lancet
(1991) - et al.
Do certain countries produce only positive results? a systematic review of controlled trials
Control Clin Trials
(1998) - et al.
Selecting the language of the publications included in a mcta-analysis: is there a Tower of Babel bias?
J Clin Epidemiol
(1995) - et al.
Redundancy, disaggregation, and the integrity of medical research
Lancet
(1996) - et al.
Lancet electronic research archive in international health and eprint server
Lancet
(1999) Evidence-based medicine
A CP J Club
(1991)The medical review article: state of the science
Ann Intern Med
(1987)- et al.
The medical review article revisited: has the science improved?
Ann Intern Med
(1999) - et al.
A comparison of results of meta analyses of randomized control trials and recommendations of clinical experts: treatments for myocar-dial infarction
JAMA
(1992) - et al.
Users' guides to the medical literature, VI: how to use an overview
JAMA
(1994)
Publication bias and research on passive smoking: comparison of published and unpublished studies
JAMA
Bias in location and selection of studies
BMJ
Publication bias: evidence of delayed publication in a cohort study of clinical research projects
BMJ
Publication bias; a problem in interpreting medical data
J R Slat Soc A
Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test
BMJ
Large trials vs meta-analysis of smaller trials: how do their results compare?
JAMA
Empirical assessment of effect of publication bias on mcta-analyses
BMJ
Positive-outeome bias and other limitations in the outcome of research abstracts submitted to a scientific meeting [published correction appears in JAMA. 1998;280:1232]
JAMA
Factors influencing publication of research results: follow-up of applications submitted to two institutional review boards
JAMA
Evaluation of conflict of interest in economic analyses of new drugs used in oncology
JAMA
Cited by (133)
Publication Bias and Selective Outcome Reporting in Randomized Controlled Trials Related to Rehabilitation: A Literature Review
2024, Archives of Physical Medicine and RehabilitationTrial Registry Searches In Plastic Surgery Systematic Reviews: A Meta-epidemiological Study
2023, Journal of Surgical ResearchNudging smokers away from lighting up: A meta-analysis of framing effect in current smokers
2023, Journal of Behavioral and Experimental EconomicsEffect sizes and effect size benchmarks in family violence research
2023, Child Abuse and NeglectASSESSMENT OF THE FREQUENCY OF REPORTING DENTAL PATIENT-REPORTED OUTCOMES (dPROs) IN A SAMPLE OF RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS ON ROOT COVERAGE PROCEDURES
2023, Journal of Evidence-Based Dental PracticeThe impact of failure on faculty development
2022, Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning
Dr Smieja is a research fellow of the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada. This work was supported in part by the American Medical Association.