Modelling multiple sources of dissemination bias in meta-analysis

Statistics in Medicine

Volumn 29, Issue 7-8, 2010, Pages 945-955

  Bowden, Jack ^a   Jackson, Dan ^a   Thompson, Simon G ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Dissemination bias; Dissemination route; Meta analysis; Monte carlo sensitivity analysis

Indexed keywords

ACETYLSALICYLIC ACID;

ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; EFFECT SIZE; HUMAN; META ANALYSIS; PAIN; SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; STATISTICAL MODEL; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW;

ASPIRIN; BIOSTATISTICS; COMPUTER SIMULATION; EDITORIAL POLICIES; HUMANS; INFORMATION DISSEMINATION; META-ANALYSIS AS TOPIC; PAIN; PERIODICALS AS TOPIC; PUBLICATION BIAS; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC; REVIEW LITERATURE AS TOPIC;

EID: 77949361444     PISSN: 02776715     EISSN: 10970258     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/sim.3813     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. DerSimonian R, Laird N. Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Controlled Clinical Trials 1986; 7:177-188.
2. Stern JM, Simes RJ. Publication bias: evidence of delayed publication in a cohort study of clinical research projects. British Medical Journal 1997; 315:640-645.
3. Dwan K, Altman DG, Arnaiz JA, Bloom J, Chan AW, Cronin E, Decullier E, Easterbrook PJ, Von Elm E, Gamble C, Ghersi D, Ioannidis JPA, Simes J, Williamson PR. Systematic review of the empirical evidence of study publication bias and outcome reporting bias. PLoS ONE 2008; 3(8):e3081.
4. Campbell H, Rudan I. Interpretation of genetic association studies in complex disease. The Pharmacogenomics Journal 2002; 6:349-360.
5. Ioannidis JPA. Why most published research findings are false. PLoS Medicine 2005; 2:696-700.
6. Light RJ, Pillemer D. Summing up: The Science of Reviewing Research. Harvard University Press: Cambridge, 1984.
7. Edwards JE, Oldman A, Smith L, Collins SL, Carroll D, Wiffen PJ, McQuay HJ, Moore RA. Single dose oral aspirin for acute pain. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 1998; 4. Art. No. CD002067. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD002067.
8. Begg CB, Mazumdar M. Operating characteristics of a rank correlation test for publication bias. Biometrics 1994; 50:1088-1101.
9. Egger M, Davey-Smith G. Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple graphical test. British Medical Journal 1997; 315:629-634.
10. Peters JL, Sutton AJ, Jones DR, Abrams KR, Rushton L. Comparison of two methods to detect publication bias in meta-analysis. Journal of the American Medical Association 2006; 295:676-680.
11. Harbord RM, Egger M, Sterne JAC. A modifed test for small-study effects in meta-analyses of controlled trials with binary endpoints. Statistics in Medicine 2006; 25:3443-3457.
12. Duval S, Tweedie RL. Trim and fill a simple funnel-plot based method for testing and adjusting for publication bias meta-analysis. Biometrics 2000; 56:455-463.
13. Hedges LV. Modeling publication selection effects in meta-analysis. Statistical Science 1992; 7:246-255.
14. Copas JB, Li HG. Inference for non-random samples (with Discussion). Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B 1997; 59:55-95.
15. Copas JB. What works? Selectivity models in meta-analysis. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A 1999; 162:95-109.
16. Copas JB, Jackson D. A bound for publication bias based on the fraction of unpublished studies. Biometrics 2004; 60:146-153.
17. Baker R, Jackson D. Using journal impact factors to correct for the publication bias of medical studies. Biometrics 2006; 62(3):785-792.
18. Greenland S. Multiple-bias modelling for analyses of observational data (with Discussion). Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A 2005; 168:267-306.
19. Hedges LV. Estimation of effect size under non-random sampling: the effects of censoring studies yielding statistically insignificant mean differences. Journal of Educational Statistics 1984; 9:61-85.
20. Preston C, Ashby D, Smyth R. Adjusting for publication bias: modelling the selection process. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice 2004; 10:313-322.
21. Jackson D. Assessing the implications of publication bias for two popular estimates of between-study variance in meta-analysis. Biometrics 2007; 63:187-193.
22. Azzalini A. A class of distributions which includes the normal ones. Scandinavian Journal of Statistics 1985; 12:171-178.
23. Copas JB. Contribution to discussion of paper by Greenland. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A 2005; 168:267-306.
24. R Development Core Team. R: A language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing: Vienna, Austria, 2004. ISBN 3-900051-07-0.
25. Rubin DB. Multiple Imputation for Non-response in Surveys. Wiley: New York, 1987.
26. Robins JM, Wang N. Inference for imputation estimators. Biometrika 2000; 187:113-124.
27. Sharp SJ, Thompson SG. Analysing the relationship between treatment effect and underlying risk in meta-analysis: comparison and development of approaches. Statistics in Medicine 2000; 19:3251-3274.
28. Begg C, Cho M, Eastwood S, Horton R, Moher D, Olkin I, Pitkin R, Rennie D, Schulz KF, Simel D, Stroup DF. Improving the quality of reporting of randomised controlled trials. The CONSORT statement. Journal of the American Medical Association 1996; 276:637-639.
29. Campbell MK, Elbourne DR, Altman DG. Consort statement: extension to cluster randomised trials. British Medical Journal 2004; 328:702-708.
30. Devereaux PJ, Manns BJ, Ghali WA, Quan H, Guyatt GH. The reporting of methodological factors in randomized controlled trials and the association with a journal policy to promote adherence to the consolidated standards of reporting trials (CONSORT) checklist. Controlled Clinical Trials 2002; 23:380-388.
31. Hutton J, Williamson P. Bias in meta-analysis due to outcome variable selection within studies. Applied Statistics 2000; 49:359-370.
32. Williamson P, Gamble C, Altman D, Hutton J. Outcome selection bias in meta-analysis. Statistical Methods in Medical Research 2005; 14:515-524.