Modeling publication bias using weighted distributions in a Bayesian framework

Computational Statistics and Data Analysis

Volumn 26, Issue 3, 1998, Pages 279-302

  Larose, Daniel T ^a   Dipak K, Dey ^b  

^a CENTRAL CONNECTICUT STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CONNECTICUT   (United States)

Author keywords

Markov chain Monte Carlo; Meta analysis; Monte Carlo estimation; Publication bias; Sampling methods; Weight function

Indexed keywords

ALGORITHMS; COMPUTATIONAL METHODS; DECISION THEORY; FUNCTIONS; MARKOV PROCESSES; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; MONTE CARLO METHODS;

BAYESIAN FRAMEWORK; META ANALYSIS; PUBLICATION BIAS; SAMPLING METHODS; WEIGHTED DISTRIBUTIONS;

STATISTICS;

BAYESIAN METHOD; PUBLICATION BIAS;

EID: 0032472283     PISSN: 01679473     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0167-9473(97)00039-X     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Bayarri, M.J., DeGroot, M.H., 1991. The analysis of published significant results. Tech. Report No. 91-21, Purdue University.
2. Begg, C.B., 1985. A measure to aid in the interpretation of published clinical trials. Stat. Med. 4, 1-9.
3. Begg, C.B., Berlin, J.A., 1988. Publication bias: a problem in interpreting medical data (with discussion). J. Roy. Stat. Soc. Ser. A 151, 419-463.
4. Berlin, J.A., Begg, C.B., Louis, T.A., 1989. An assessment of publication bias using a sample of published clinical trials. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 84, 381-392.
5. Box, G., 1980. Sampling Bayes' inference in scientific modeling and robustness. J. Roy. Statist. Soc. Ser. A 143, 382-430 (with discussion).
6. Bozarth, J.D., Roberts, R.R., 1972. Signifying significant significance. Amer. Psychol. 27, 774-775.
7. British Medical Journal, 1983. The editor regrets .... (Editorial), 280, 508.
8. Chalmers, I., 1988. The Oxford Database of Perinatal Trials. Oxford University Press, New York.
9. Chalmers, T.C., Frank, C.S., Reitman, D., 1990. Minimizing the three stages of publication bias. J. Amer. Med. Assoc. 263, 1392-1395.
10. Chib, S., Greenberg, E., 1995. Understanding the Metropolis-Hastings algorithm. Amer. Statist. 49, 327-335.
11. Dear, K.B.G., Begg, C.B., 1992. An approach for assessing publication bias prior to performing a meta-analysis. Stat. Sci. 7, 237-245.
12. Dickersin, K., 1990. The existence of publication bias and risk factors for its occurrence. J. Amer. Med. Assoc. 263, 1385-1389.
13. Dickersin, K., Min, Y.I., Meinert, C.L., 1992. Factors influencing publication of research results. J. Amer. Med. Assoc. 267, 374-378.
14. Easterbrook, P.J., Berlin, J.A., Gopalan, R., Matthews, D.R., 1991. Publication bias in clinical research. Lancet 337, 867-872.
15. Geisser, S.W., Eddy, 1979. A predictive approach to model selection. J. Amer. Stat. Assoc. 74, 153-160.
16. Gelfand, A.E., Dey, D.K., Chang, H., 1992. Model determination using predictive distributions with implementation via sampling-based methods. In: Bernardo, J. et al. (Eds.), Bayesian Statistics, vol. 4. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 147-167.
17. Gelfand, A.E., Smith, A.F.M., 1990. Sampling-based approaches to calculating marginal densities. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 85, 398-409.
18. Gelman, A., Rubin, D.B., 1992. Inference from iterative simulation using multiple sequences (with discussion). Statist. Sci. 7(4), 457-511.
19. Geman, S., Geman, D., 1984. Stochastic relaxation, Gibbs distributions, and the Bayesian restoration of images. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Machine Intelligence 6, 721-741.
20. Geweke, J., 1989. Bayesian inference in econometric models using Monte Carlo integration. Econometrica 57, 1317-1339.
21. Givens, G.H., Smith, D.D., Tweedie, R.L., 1995. Estimating and adjusting for publication bias using data augmentation in Bayesian meta-analysis. Tech. Report 95-31, Colorado State University.
22. Hedges, L.V., 1984. Estimation of effect size under nonrandom sampling: the effects of censoring studies yielding statistically significant mean differences. J. Educational Statist. 9, 61-85.
23. Hedges, L.V., 1992. Modeling publication selection effects in meta-analysis. Statist. Sci. 7, 246-255.
24. Hedges, L.V., Olkin, I., 1985. Statistical Methods for Meta-analysis. Academic Press, Orlando.
25. Iyengar, S., Greenhouse, J.B., 1988. Selection models and the file drawer problem. Statist. Sci. 3, 109-135.
26. Jeffreys, H., 1961. Theory of Probability. Oxford University Press, London.
27. Lane, D.M., Dunlap, W.P., 1978. Estimating effect size: bias resulting from the significance criterion in editorial decions. Bri. J. Math. Statist. Psychol. 31, 107-112.
28. Larose, D.T., Dey, D.K., 1996. Weighted distributions viewed in the context of model selection: a Bayesian perspective. Test 5 (1), 227-246.
29. Light, R.J., Pillemer, D.B., 1984. Summing up: the Science of Reviewing Research. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
30. Mahoney, M.J., 1977. Publication prejudices: an experimental study of confirmatory bias in the peer review system. Cogn. Therapy Res. 1, 161-175.
31. Melton, A.W., 1962. Editorial. J. Exp. Psychol. 64, 553-557.
32. Mengersen, K.L., Tweedie, R.L., Biggerstaff, B.J., 1995. The impact of method choice in meta-analysis. Aust. J. Stat. 7, 19-44.
33. Metropolis, N., Rosenbluth, A.W., Rosenbluth, M.N., Teller, A.H., Teller, E., 1953. Equation of state calculations by fast computing machines. J. Chem. Phys. 21, 1087-1092.
34. Morris, C., Normand, S.L., 1992. Hierarchical models for combining information and for meta-analyses (with discussion), In: Bernardo, J., Berger, J., Dawid, A., Smith, A. (Eds.), Bayesian Statistics, vol. 4. Oxford University Press, London, pp. 3121-34.
35. Normand, S.L., 1994. Random effects methods for dose-response meta-analyses. Manuscript, Harvard School of Public Health.
36. Olkin, I., 1992. Publication bias Statist. Sci. 7 (2), 235-236.
37. Patil, G.P., Taillie, C., 1989. Probing encountered data, meta-analysis and weighted distribution methods. In: Dodge, Y. (Ed.), Statistical Data Analysis and Inference. Elsevier, North-Holland, pp. 317-345.
38. Pettit, L.I., Young, K.D.S., 1990. Measuring the effect of observations on Bayes factors. Biomet. 77, 455-466.
39. Rao, C.R., 1985. Weighted Distributions arising out of methods of Ascertainment: What population does a sample represent? In: Atkinson, A.G., Fienberg, S.E. (Eds.), A Celebration of Statistics: The ISI Centenary vol. Springer, New York, pp. 543-569.
40. Raftery, A.E., 1994. Hypothesis testing and model selection Via posterior simulation. Manuscript.
41. Rosenthal, R., 1979. The file drawer problem and tolerance for null results. Psychol. Bull. 86, 638-641.
42. Simes, R.J., 1986. Publication bias: the case for an international registry of clinical trials. J. Clin. Oncol. 4, 1529-1541.
43. Smith, D.D., Givens, G.H., Tweedie, R.L., 1997. Adjustment for publication and quality bias in bayesian meta-analysis. Tech. Report, Department of Statistics, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO.
44. Sterling, T.D., 1959. Publication decisions and their possible effects on inferences drawn from tests of significance or vice versa. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 54, 30-34.
45. Sterling, T.D., Rosenbaum, W.L., Weinkam, J.J., 1995. Publication decisions revisited: the effect of the outcome of statistical tests on the decision to publish and vice versa. Amer. Statistician 49, 108 -112.
46. Thompson, S.G., 1993. Controversies in meta-analysis: the case of the trials of serum cholesterol reduction. Statist. Meth. Med. Res. 2, 173-192.