What contributions do languages other than English make on the results of meta-analyses?

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

Volumn 53, Issue 9, 2000, Pages 964-972

  Moher, David ^a,b   Pham, ^a   Klassen, Terry P ^a,b   Schulz, Kenneth F ^c   Berlin, Jesse A ^d   Jadad, Alejandro R ^e   Liberati, Alessandro ^f  

^a CHILDREN S HOSPITAL OF EASTERN ONTARIO   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF OTTAWA   (Canada)

^c UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA   (United States)

^d Center for Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics   (United States)

^e MCMASTER UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^f MARIO NEGRI INSTITUTE FOR PHARMACOLOGICAL RESEARCH   (Italy)

Author keywords

Bias; Language of publication; Meta analysis; Methodology; Randomized controlled trials

Indexed keywords

ANALYTICAL ERROR; ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; EPIDEMIOLOGICAL DATA; HUMAN; LANGUAGE; META ANALYSIS; METHODOLOGY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY CONTROL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL;

HUMANS; LANGUAGE; LOGISTIC MODELS; META-ANALYSIS; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS; SELECTION BIAS;

EID: 0033834484     PISSN: 08954356     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0895-4356(00)00188-8     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Grégoire G., Derderian F., LeLorier J. Selecting the language of the publications included in a meta-analysis. is there a tower of babel bias? J Clin Epidemiol. 48(1):1995;159-163.
2. Moher D., Fortin P., Jadad A.R., Juni P., Kiassen T., Le Lorier J., Liberati A., Linde K., Penna A. Completeness of reporting of trials published in languages other than English. Implications for the conduct and reporting of systematic reviews Lancet. 347:1996;363-366.
3. Jadad A.R., Moore A., Carroll D., Jenkinson C., Reynolds D.J.M., Gavaghan D.J., McQuay H.J. Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials. is blinding necessary? Control Clin Trials. 17:1996;1-12.
4. Egger M., Zellweger-Zahner T., Schneider M., Junker C., Lengeler C., Antes G. Language bias in randomised controlled trials published in English and German. Lancet. 350:1997;326-329.
5. Moher D., Cook D.J., Jadad A.R., Tugwell P., Moher M., Jones A., Pham B., Klassen T.P. Assessing the quality of randomized controlled trials. implications for the conduct of meta-analyses Health Technology Assessment. 3(12):1999;1-98.
6. Jadad A.R., Cook D.J., Jones A., Klassen T.P., Tugwell P., Moher M., Moher D. Methodology and reports of systematic reviews and meta-analyses. A comparison of Cochrane reviews with articles published in paper-based journals JAMA. 280:1998;278-280.
7. Moher D., Pham B., Jones A., Cook D.J., Jadad A.R., Moher M., Tugwell P., Klassen T.P. Does quality of reports of randomised trials affect estimates of intervention efficacy reported in meta-analyses? Lancet. 352:1998;609-613.
8. Oxman A.D., Guyatt G.H. Validation of an index of the quality of review articles. J Clin Epidemiol. 44(11):1991;1271-1278.
9. Fleiss J.L. The Design and Analysis of Clinical Experiments. 1986;John Wiley & Sons; New York, NY, USA. p. 1-32.
10. Landis J.R., Koch G.G. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics. 33:1977;159-174.
11. Schulz K.F., Chalmers I., Hayes R., Altman D.G. Empirical evidence of bias. Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials JAMA. 273:1995;408-412.
12. Poynard T., Naveau S., Mory B., Chaput J.C. Meta-analysis of smooth muscle relaxants in the treatment of irritable bowel syndrome. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 8:1994;499-510.
13. Chalmers T.C., Berrier J., Sacks H.S., Levin H., Reitman D., Nagalingam R. Meta-analysis of clinical trials as a scientific discipline. II. Replicate variability and comparison of studies that agree and disagree Stat Med. 6:1987;733-744.
14. Yusuf S., Peto R., Lewis J., Collins R., Sleight P. Beta-blockade during and after myocardial infarction. an overview of the randomized trials Prog Cardiovasc Dis. 27:1985;335-371.
15. Dickersin K., Higgins K., Meinert C.L. Identification of meta-analyses. The need for standard terminology Control Clin Trials. 11:1990;52-66.
16. Tramer M., Reynolds D.J.M., Moore R.A., McQuay H.J. Impact of covert duplicate publication on meta-analysis. a case study BMJ. 315:1997;635-640.
17. Khan K.S., Daya S., Collins J.A., Walter S. Empirical evidence of bias in infertility research. Overestimation of treatment effect in crossover trials using pregnancy as the outcome measure Fertil Steril. 65:1996;939-945.
18. Berlin J.A. Does blinding of readers affect the results of meta-analyses? Lancet. 350:1997;185-186.
19. Barnes D.E., Bero L.A. Why review articles on the health effects of passive smoking reach different conclusions. JAMA. 279:1998;1566-1570.
20. Simes R.J. Publication bias. the case for an international registry of clinical trials J Clin Oncol. 4:1986;1529-1541.
21. Moher D., Pham B., Ausejo M., Saenz A., Hood S.C., Barber G. Pharmacological management of intermittent claudication. a meta-analysis of randomized trials Drugs. 59:2000;1057-1070.
22. Shea B, Dubé C, Moher D. Assessing the quality of reports of meta-analyses: a systematic review of scales and checklists. In: Egger M, Altman D, Smith GD, editors. Systematic Reviews in Health Care, 2nd edition. London, UK: BMJ Publishing Group, In press.
23. Vandenbroucke-Grauls C.M.J.E., Vandenbroucke J.P. Effect of selective decontamination of the digestive tract on respiratory tract infections and mortality in the intensive care unit. Lancet. 338:1991;859-862.
24. Thülig B., Hartenauer U., Diemer W., Lawin P., Fegeler W., Kehrel R., Ritzerfeld W. Selektive Florasuppression zur Infektionskontrolle in der Operativen Intensivmedizin. Anästh Intensivther Notfallmed. 24:1989;345-354.
25. Anonymous Metaanalysis of randomized controlled trials of selective decontamination of the digestive tract. Selective Decontamination of the Digestive Tract Trialsts' Collaborative Group. BMJ. 307:1993;525-532.
26. Jadad A.R., McQuay H.J. Meta-analyses to evaluate analgesic interventions. a systematic qualitative review of their methodology J Clin Epidemiol. 49:1996;235-243.
27. Shea B, Moher D, Pham B, Tugwell P. Assessing the quality of reporting of meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials. Poster presentation at the VII Cochrane Colloquium, Rome, Italy, 5-9 October 1999.
28. Begg C.B., Cho M.K., Eastwood S., Horton R., Moher D., Olkin I., Rennie D., Schulz K.F., Simel D.L., Stroup D.F. Improving the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials. The CONSORT statement JAMA. 276:1996;637-639.
29. Moher D, Cook DJ, Eastwood S, Olkin I, Rennie D, Stroup D, for the QUOROM group. Improving the quality of reporting of meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials: The QUOROM statement. Lancet 1999;354:1896-1900.
30. Vickers A., Goyal N., Harland R., Rees R. Do certain countries produce only positive results? A systematic review of controlled trials. Control Clin Trials. 19:1998;159-166.
31. Tang J.L., Zhan S.Y., Ernst E. Review of randomised controlled trials of traditional Chinese medicine. BMJ. 319:1999;160-161.