Methods to select results to include in meta-analyses deserve more consideration in systematic reviews

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

Volumn 68, Issue 11, 2015, Pages 1282-1291

  Page, Matthew J ^a   McKenzie, Joanne E ^a   Chau, Marisa ^a   Green, Sally E ^a   Forbes, Andrew ^a  

^a MONASH UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

Bias; Meta analysis; Randomized controlled trials; Reporting; Research methodology; Systematic review

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; DATA BASE; DATA EXTRACTION; DECISION MAKING; HUMAN; MANDATORY REPORTING; MEDICAL RESEARCH; META ANALYSIS; METHODOLOGY; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); RATING SCALE; RISK FACTOR; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; INFORMATION RETRIEVAL; LITERATURE; META ANALYSIS (TOPIC);

INFORMATION STORAGE AND RETRIEVAL; META-ANALYSIS AS TOPIC; RESEARCH DESIGN; REVIEW LITERATURE AS TOPIC;

EID: 84945491285     PISSN: 08954356     EISSN: 18785921     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2015.02.009     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. R. Bender, C. Bunce, M. Clarke, S. Gates, S. Lange, N.L. Pace, and et al. Attention should be given to multiplicity issues in systematic reviews J Clin Epidemiol 61 2008 857 865
2. B. Tendal, E. Nüesch, J.P. Higgins, P. Jüni, and P.C. Gøtzsche Multiplicity of data in trial reports and the reliability of meta-analyses: empirical study BMJ 343 2011 d4829
3. M.J. Page, J.E. McKenzie, and A. Forbes Many scenarios exist for selective inclusion and reporting of results in randomized trials and systematic reviews J Clin Epidemiol 66 2013 524 537
4. J. Chandler, R. Churchill, J. Higgins, T. Lasserson, and D. Tovey Methodological standards for the conduct of new Cochrane Intervention Reviews. Version 2.3 2013 Available at http://www.editorial-unit.cochrane.org/mecir Accessed October 9, 2014
5. Institute of Medicine (IOM) Finding what works in health care: standards for systematic reviews 2011 The National Academies Press Washington, DC
6. AHRQ Publication No. 10(14)-EHC063-EF. Methods guide for effectiveness and comparative effectiveness reviews 2014 Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Rockville, MD Chapters available at http://www.effectivehealthcare.ahrq.gov Accessed October 9, 2014
7. S. Reichenbach, R. Sterchi, M. Scherer, S. Trelle, E. Bürgi, U. Bürgi, and et al. Meta-analysis: chondroitin for osteoarthritis of the knee or hip Ann Intern Med 146 2007 580 590
8. P. Jüni, S. Reichenbach, and P. Dieppe Osteoarthritis: rational approach to treating the individual Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol 20 4 2006 721 740
9. V. Hasselblad Meta-analysis of multitreatment studies Med Decis Making 18 1998 37 43 PubMed PMID: 9456207. eng
10. Higgins JPT, Deeks JJ. Chapter 7: selecting studies and collecting data. In: Higgins JPT, Green S, editors. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration. Available at http://www.cochrane-handbook.org. Accessed October 9, 2014.
11. B. Tendal, J.P.T. Higgins, P. Jüni, A. Hróbjartsson, S. Trelle, E. Nüesch, and et al. Disagreements in meta-analyses using outcomes measured on continuous or rating scales: observer agreement study BMJ 339 2009 b3128
12. D. Moher, J. Tetzlaff, A.C. Tricco, M. Sampson, and D.G. Altman Epidemiology and reporting characteristics of systematic reviews PLoS Med 4 2007 e78
13. L. Turner, J. Galipeau, C. Garritty, E. Manheimer, L.S. Wieland, F. Yazdi, and et al. An evaluation of epidemiological and reporting characteristics of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) systematic reviews (SRs) PLoS One 8 2013 e53536
14. M. Boers, J.R. Kirwan, G. Wells, D. Beaton, L. Gossec, M.-A. d'Agostino, and et al. Developing core outcome measurement sets for clinical trials: OMERACT Filter 2.0 J Clin Epidemiol 67 2014 745 753
15. P. Tugwell, M. Boers, P. Brooks, L. Simon, V. Strand, and L. Idzerda OMERACT: an international initiative to improve outcome measurement in rheumatology Trials 8 1 2007 38
16. R. Altman, K. Brandt, M. Hochberg, R. Moskowitz, N. Bellamy, D.A. Bloch, and et al. Design and conduct of clinical trials in patients with osteoarthritis: recommendations from a task force of the osteoarthritis research society: results from a workshop Osteoarthritis and Cartilage 4 1996 217 243
17. M.J. Page, J.E. McKenzie, S.E. Green, and A.B. Forbes An empirical investigation of the potential impact of selective inclusion of results in systematic reviews of interventions: study protocol Syst Rev 2 2013 21
18. J. Kirkham, M. Boers, P. Tugwell, M. Clarke, and P. Williamson Outcome measures in rheumatoid arthritis randomised trials over the last 50 years Trials 14 2013 324
19. CMSG Search Strategies. Availabe at http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/o/cochrane/clabout/articles/MUSKEL/frame.html. Accessed October 9, 2014.
20. CCDAN Search Strategies. Availabe at http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/o/cochrane/clabout/articles/DEPRESSN/frame.html. Accessed October 9, 2014.
21. Deeks JJ, Higgins JPT, Altman DG. Chapter 9: analysing data and undertaking meta-analyses. In: Higgins JPT, Green S, editors. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration. Available at http://www.cochrane-handbook.org. Accessed October 9, 2014.
22. R. Fu, B.W. Vandermeer, T. Shamliyan, M.E. O'Neil, F. Yazdi, S.H. Fox, and et al. Chapter 14: handling continuous outcomes in quantitative synthesis AHRQ Publication No. 10(14)-EHC063-EF Methods guide for effectiveness and comparative effectiveness reviews 2014 Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Rockville, MD Chapters available at http://www.effectivehealthcare.ahrq.gov Accessed October 9, 2014
23. A.W. Chan, A. Hrobjartsson, M.T. Haahr, P.C. Gotzsche, and D.G. Altman Empirical evidence for selective reporting of outcomes in randomized trials: comparison of protocols to published articles JAMA 291 2004 2457 2465
24. C. Clopper, and E. Pearson The use of confidence or fiducial limits illustrated in the case of the binomial Biometrika 26 1934 404 413
25. StataCorp Stata statistical software: release 12 2011 StataCorp LP College Station, TX
26. R.G. Newcombe Interval estimation for the difference between independent proportions: comparison of eleven methods Stat Med 17 1998 873 890
27. R. Scherer PropCIs: various confidence interval methods for proportions. R package version 0.2-5 2014 Available at http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=PropCIs Accessed October 9, 2014
28. Team RC R: a language and environment for statistical computing 2012 R Foundation for Statistical Computing Vienna, Austria
29. I. McDowell Measuring health: a guide to rating scales and questionnaires 3rd ed 2006 Oxford University Press New York
30. P.P. Glasziou, I. Chalmers, S. Green, and S. Michie Intervention synthesis: a missing link between a systematic review and practical treatment(s) PLos Med 11 2014 e1001690
31. J.F. Fries, P. Spitz, R.G. Kraines, and H.R. Holman Measurement of patient outcome in arthritis Arthritis Rheum 23 1980 137 145
32. K. Demyttenaere, and J. De Fruyt Getting what you ask for: on the selectivity of depression rating scales Psychother Psychosom 72 2 2003 61 70
33. R. Balon Rating scales for anxiety/anxiety disorders Curr Psychiatr Rep 9 2007 271 277
34. J.P.T. Higgins, J.J. Deeks, and D.G. Altman Chapter 16: special topics in statistics J.P.T. Higgins, S. Green, Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions 2008 John Wiley & Sons Ltd West Sussex, England